Delhi High Court - Orders
Emaar Properties Pjsc vs Address Infrastructures Private ... on 12 July, 2022
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS (COMM) 465/2022
EMAAR PROPERTIES PJSC ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Dhruv Anand
and Ms. Udita Patro, Advocates.
(M:9313399860)
versus
ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED .. Defendant
Through: Mr. Samar Bansal and Mr. Chritarth
Palli, Advocates with Mr. Inderjit
Singh and Mr. Brijeshwar Jaswal in
person.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 12.07.2022 I.A. 10476/2022 (for exemption)
1. This is an application seeking exemption from filing cleared/typed or translated copies of documents. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. I.A. 10476/2022 is disposed of.
I.A. 10478/2022 (u/S 12A)
3. This is an application seeking exemption from instituting pre- litigation mediation. In view of the orders passed in CS (COMM) 132/2022 titled Upgrad Education v. Intellipaat Software, I.A. 10478/2022 is allowed and disposed of.
I.A.10477/2022 (for court fee)
4. This is an application seeking extension of time for filing court fees.
CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:14.07.2022 10:56:53One week's time is granted to the Plaintiff to file the court fees.
5. I.A.10477/2022 is disposed of.
I.A.10475/2022 (for filing additional documents)
6. This is an application 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 Commercial Courts Act.
7. I.A.10475/2022 is disposed of.
CS (COMM) 465/2022
8. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
9. Issue summons. Summons are accepted by Mr. Chritarth, ld. Counsel for the Defendant.
10. A written statement to the plaint shall be positively filed 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.
11. Liberty is given to the Plaintiff to file a replication within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication, if any, filed by the Plaintiff, 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 documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
12. List before Court on 20th September, 2022.
CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 2 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:14.07.2022 10:56:53I.A.10474/2022 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC)
13. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff- Emaar Properties PJSC against the Defendant- Address Infrastructure Private Limited seeking protection of its rights in the name/mark 'ADDRESS'. The said mark is stated to be used by the Plaintiff in respect of its luxury hotels in Dubai and various other countries. The case of the Plaintiff is that it is one of the world's largest real estate companies. It is involved in the business of real estate, hospitality services and other related services. The Plaintiff adopted the mark 'ADDRESS' in the year 2007. The Plaintiff claims to have various properties i.e., hotels and resorts bearing the name/ mark 'ADDRESS' in Dubai, Fujairah, Egypt and Turkey. Some of the resorts and hotel properties of the Plaintiff are stated to be high end luxury projects. Apart from the existing properties, the Plaintiff is also in the course of development of new projects in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. It is the case of the Plaintiff that the mark 'ADDRESS' has acquired enormous reputation and the mark of the Plaintiff is widely renowned.
14. The Plaintiff has various registered trademarks dating back to 2008. The details of the trade mark registrations of the Plaintiff is as under:
TRADE MARK CLASS APPLICATION/ REGISTRATION
REGISTRATION NO.
DATE
THE ADDRESS 42 06.05.2008 1684144
(word)
THE ADDRESS 43 24.04.2018 3814452
(word)
CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 3 of 6
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:14.07.2022
10:56:53
36 03.09.2018 3934357
43 3934358
35 3934359
15. The grievance of the Plaintiff in the present case is that the Defendant has started using the mark 'THE ADDRESS' and 'ADDRESS' as part of its corporate name and the name of real estate projects which the Defendant has launched. The Defendant is also stated to have adopted the following device mark:
16. The Defendant has filed two trade mark applications being 5123194 and 5123195 for the word mark 'THE ADDRESS' in classes 36 and 37 claiming user in the said mark since 2015.
17. Mr. Anand, ld. Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff submits that there is a likelihood that there is some association/connection between the Plaintiff and Defendant's projects, inasmuch as the Plaintiff has transborder reputation in India. The same is evident from documents placed on record when the Plaintiff was exploring a joint venture in India. Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff further highlights the fact that the logo being used by the Defendant is also deceptively similar, which demonstrates the mala fides in adoption of CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:14.07.2022 10:56:53 the mark.
18. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Defendant submits that the Defendant has two projects which are already constructed and one upcoming project. The Defendant itself was incorporated in 2015. The Defendant also claims to be the registered proprietor of the mark "ADDRESS INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP" in class 37. Further, submission of ld. Counsel for the Defendant is that RERA registration has been granted to Defendant's project wayback in 2017. Moreover, one of the Plaintiff's own projects under the EMAAR brand is closely located to the Defendant's project and hence the Plaintiff has always had knowledge of the use of the mark/name ADDRESS by the Defendant.
19. Heard. The Plaintiff has conceded that the Plaintiff does not have a running project in India, though it has registered trademarks in India. The Plaintiff places its case on transborder reputation as also reputation on the basis of publicity since 2013. Considering the contentions of the parties and the fact that the Defendant already has two running projects, the following shall be the ad interim arrangement till the hearing of the application for interim injunction:
(1) The Defendant's projects in Mohali District, Punjab with the name 'The Address' at Village Togan, Tehsil Majri, District SAS Nagar-Mohali. Area Known as Sector 17, Near Cricket Stadium, New Chandigarh, SAS Nagar Mohali and 'Erina Address' at City, Kharar, On Kharar Kurali Highway, District Mohali shall continue. It also claims to have one upcoming project at Village Ugrakheri, Panipat, Haryana which it intends to start.CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 5 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:14.07.2022 10:56:53
(2) Apart from the above projects, if the Defendant intends to expand to any other project with the name consisting of the word 'Address', it shall seek leave of the Court before doing so. (3) The Defendant shall place on record the actual site photographs of the three projects along with its reply to the interim injunction application.
20. Let the reply to the injunction application be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
21. List on 20th September, 2022 for hearing on the interim application.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
JULY 12, 2022/dk/sk CS (COMM) 465/2022 Page 6 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:14.07.2022 10:56:53