Delhi High Court - Orders
Lottoland Holdings Private Limited vs Kuldeep Sharma on 18 September, 2023
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~29
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 644/2023 and I.A. 17955/2023-17958/2023,
18104/2023
LOTTOLAND HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Rahul Ajatshatru, Mr. Kartikeya
Prasad and Ms. Daisy Roy, Advocates
(M- 8876886063)
versus
KULDEEP SHARMA ..... Defendant
Through: None.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 18.09.2023
1. This hearing has been done though hybrid mode.
I.A. 17958/2023 (for exemption)
2. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from filing originals/certified/translated copies of documents, etc., Original documents shall be produced/filed at the time of Admission/Denial, if sought, strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
3. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
I.A. 17957/2023 (for additional documents)
4. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking leave to file additional documents under the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter, 'Commercial Courts Act'). The Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the CS(COMM) 644/2023 Page 1 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 21:47:53 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
5. Accordingly, application is disposed of.
I.A. 17956/2023 (u/S 12A of the Commercial Courts Act)
6. This is an application filed by the Plaintiffs seeking exemption instituting pre-litigation mediation. In view of the orders passed in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R A Perfumery Works Private Ltd, 2022/DHC/004454, the application is allowed and disposed of. I.A. 18104/2023 (for court fee)
7. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking extension of time to deposit deficient court fee. The injunction order shall not be uploaded until the court fee receipt is produced before the Court Master.
8. Accordingly, application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 644/2023
9. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
10. Issue summons to the Defendant through all modes upon filing of Process Fee.
11. The summons to the Defendant shall indicate that a written statement to the plaint, shall be filed positively within 30 days from date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statement, the Defendant shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without which the written statement shall not be taken on record.
12. Liberty is given to the Plaintiff to file a replication within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication, if any, filed by the Plaintiff's, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the Defendant, be filed by the Plaintiff, without which the replication shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any CS(COMM) 644/2023 Page 2 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 21:47:53 documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
13. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 10th November, 2023. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would be liable to be burdened with costs.
14. List before Court on 5th March, 2024.
I.A. 17955/2023 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC)
15. Issue notice.
16. The present suit has been filed by M/s Lottoland Holdings Private Limited, Gibraltar seeking injunction against the Defendant - Mr. Kuldeep Sharma from using the word mark 'LOTTOLAND' and device thereof.
17. The Plaintiff claims to be the global leader in offering services including online games, lottery, draws, win games, scratch cards, etc. The said services are stated to have been offered by the Plaintiff since May, 2013. The Plaintiff claims to be the largest betting and gambling services conglomerates in the World and is an online lottery operator with a full range of products including betting, lottery messenger, instant lotteries, etc. Though the services of the Plaintiff are being offered in several abroad countries. In India, the case of the Plaintiff is that, the compliances are currently being undertaken in order to enable the Plaintiff to enter India. The Plaintiff's services are offered under the mark and device 'LOTTOLAND/Lottoland/LOTOLAND. The logos used by the Plaintiff are extracted below:
CS(COMM) 644/2023 Page 3 of 5This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 21:47:53 The above marks are stated to be registered in a large number of countries including Colombia, Japan, Republic of Korea, China, Czech Republic, Belarus, Israel, Switzerland, Cuba, Morocco, Norway, Singapore, Turkey, Ukraine, Liechtenstein.
18. As per the Plaintiff, it learnt of the Defendant's trademark application bearing number 4642253 when the Plaintiff's Madrid Protocol application was entering into national phase.
19. The ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff submits that the mark/device adopted by the Defendants are almost identical and the Defendant has applied it on a 'proposed to be used basis' in classes 35 and 36, which itself shows that the Defendant is not intending to do any genuine business in this mark. In respect of one device, the Defendant also holds a registration bearing no.4642254 in Class 36.
20. Heard the ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff. A perusal of the trademark application of the Defendant would show that the device of the Defendant is identical to that of Plaintiff. It has been copied even in terms of the colour scheme. The same is nothing but a dishonest attempt by the Defendant to appropriate the Plaintiff's mark. Moreover, the mark itself is 'proposed to be used basis' and as per third party opposition pleadings which are placed on CS(COMM) 644/2023 Page 4 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 21:47:54 record, it does not appear that the Defendant is doing any genuine business under the said mark.
21. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, If the Defendant has not launched any business or service under the mark 'LOTTOLAND'/ and the device thereof, the Defendant shall maintain status quo and shall not launch any services or goods under the LOTTOLAND mark or device, till the next date of hearing.
22. Reply to the application be filed within four weeks from the service of the present order along with the paper book.
23. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC within a week.
24. List before the Court on 5th March, 2024.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 18, 2023 Rahul/ks CS(COMM) 644/2023 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2023 at 21:47:54