Delhi High Court - Orders
Pb Fintech Pvt Ltd vs Policy Bazar Finance & Ors on 11 November, 2020
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS (COMM) 471/2020 & I.A. No. 9795/2020
PB FINTECH PVT LTD .....Plaintiff
Through Mr. Kapil Wadhwa, Adv.
versus
POLICY BAZAR FINANCE & ORS. .....Defendants
Through None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
ORDER
% 11.11.2020 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
1. The case, which the plaintiff has broadly set up, is as follows. 1.1 The plaintiff claims that it is the owner of the well-known trademarks "POLICYBAZAAR" and "PAISABAZAAR".
1.2 It is also averred on behalf of the plaintiff that it operates two popular websites i.e. www.policybazaar.com and www.paisabazaar.com qua its insurance and financial products' respectively. 1.3 Mr. Kapil Wadhwa, who appears for the plaintiff, says that the plaintiff has partnered with various insurance companies and banks as also mutual funds for offering insurance and financial products to the consumers. 1.4 In sum, it is claimed that the plaintiff is a web aggregator and by virtue of the information put out on its websites, it is able to offer choices to the consumers qua insurances and financial products that are put out for sale by various insurance companies and banks.
1.5 The plaintiff claims that it has approached this Court for necessary relief in view of the fact that defendant nos. 1 to 8 are operating rogue websites and consequently duping the public at large by having them believe Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:12.11.2020 07:51:22 that the websites operated by them have their source in the plaintiff. 1.6 Mr. Wadhwa, thus, submits that the activities of defendant nos. 1 to 8 are resulting not only in the infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademarks but also other tortious acts such as passing off, dilution and tarnishing of the plaintiff's trademark as also cyber squatting.
2. I have heard Mr. Wadhwa and perused the documents filed along with the plaint.
3. To my mind, the plaintiff, at least at this stage, has been able to establish a prima facie case in its favour.
3.1 The balance of convenience also appears to be in favour of the plaintiff given the extent of revenue generated by it. The details qua sales revenue are set out in paragraph 8 of the plaint.
3.2 The amount spent by the plaintiff on advertising, the figures qua which are set out in paragraph 9 of the plaint, also establish the fact that the balance of convenience, presently, is tilted in favour of the plaintiff. 3.3 Since defendant nos. 1 to 8, appear to be running rogue websites, they could cause irreparable damage, not only to the plaintiff but also to the public at large.
4. Given these circumstances, issue summons in the suit and notice in the captioned application to the defendants via all means including e-mail. 4.1 In the meanwhile, till the next date of hearing, defendant nos. 1 to 8, their agents, employees, partners and associates are restrained from using the trademark/logo "POLICYBAZAAR" and "PAISABAZAAR" or any other mark or logo which is deceptively similar to the aforementioned marks. This injunction will also operate qua the respective domain names administered by defendant nos. 1 to 8.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:12.11.2020 07:51:224.2 Furthermore, the concerned domain name registrars [DNRs], whose details are given hereafter, will block/suspend the websites of defendant nos. 1 to 8, which are registered with them.
S. No. Domain Name Infringing Website Infringing Domain
Registrars Operators Name
1. Defendant No.9 Defendant No.1 policybazarfinance.com
Defendant No.2
paisabazarfinance.in
Defendant No.3
Defendant No.8 paisabazaarloanapply.com
policybazaarclub.com
2. Defendant No.10 Defendant No.4 agencybazaar.in
3. Defendant No.11 Defendant No.5 paisabaazaar.co.in
4. Defendant No.12 Defendant No.6 paisabazaras.com
5. Defendant No.13 Defendant No.7 paisabazzarfinance.com
4.3 Besides this, defendant nos. 14 and 15 shall issue notifications to
various internet service providers and telecom service providers to block access to the infringing domain names of defendant nos. 1 to 8.
5. This apart, leave is given to the plaintiff to approach this Court to array other rogue website(s), who carry on similar activities, albeit illegally, as and when the same comes to its notice.
6. The plaintiff will comply with the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 within five days of the receipt of a copy of the order.
7. List the matter on 03.02.2021.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J NOVEMBER 11, 2020 Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:12.11.2020 07:51:22