Delhi High Court - Orders
Sandisk Llc vs Jpy Mobile Phone Accessories & Anr on 17 May, 2022
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:19.05.2022
10:31:12
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS (COMM) 546/2020 & I.A. 3026/2021
SANDISK LLC ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Prithvi Singh & Ms. Devyani
Nath, Advocates. (M:8860680136)
versus
JPY MOBILE PHONE ACCESSORIES & ANR. ..... Defendant
Through: None.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 17.05.2022
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
I.A. 3026/2021 in CS(COMM) 546/2020
2. This is an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC, seeking arrest and detention of the contemnors for violation of the injunction order dated 11th December, 2020.
3. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking permanent injunction restraining the infringement of trademark, trade dress, copyright, as also reliefs for passing off, rendition of accounts of profits, damages and delivery up in respect of products under the Plaintiff's trademark 'SanDisk'. Vide previous order dated 11th December, 2020, an ex parte interim injunction was granted by the Court in favour of the Plaintiff and a Local Commissioner was appointed. Subsequently, the Local Commissioner had filed her report dated 11th January, 2021, which recorded that a large quantity of memory cards/dual drive/pen drive, under the Plaintiff's name 'Sandisk' were confiscated from the premises of the Defendant-JPY Mobile Phone Accessories (hereinafter "JPY Mobile"). The report also records that CS(COMM) 546/2020 Page 1 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:19.05.2022 10:31:12 certain persons claiming to be packing persons and pick up persons for the Defendant were present at the premises. In adjoining rooms, the Commissioner also found products of 'Sandisk', which were claimed to be of one JPW Mobile/Defendant No.3 (hereinafter "JPW Mobile") and not JPY Mobile Accessories. JPW Mobile was stated to be associated with Mr. Shivshankar Gupta and Mr. Vikas Gupta, both present at the premises, being the brothers of Mr Ajay Gupta- owner of JPY Mobile. While 1736 products were confiscated from JPY Mobile, 953 pieces were confiscated from JPW Mobile and superdarinama was prepared and provided along with the on spot report and inventory, to the representatives of JPY Mobile and JPW Mobile.
4. The grievance of the Plaintiff is that despite the injunction order dated 11th December, 2020 and the local commission having been executed and huge stocks of counterfeit 'SanDisk' pendrives having been seized and being given on superdari, the Defendants continue to sell the infringing products. Mr. Prithvi Singh, ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff, has handed over website printouts of the Defendants' website www.jpmobile.in, where the Defendants are advertising products even as on date under the mark/label 'SanDisk'. The Defendants have also not appeared in the matter after service and they have been proceeded ex parte vide order dated 21st January, 2021. The interim injunction has already been confirmed on the said date.
5. It is clear that the Defendants are well aware of the order passed by this Court and are completely avoiding appearance before the Court. Non- appearance would also not give the Defendants any licence to continue to violate the order which is already operating.
6. Considering the nature of the matter, and the fact that the Defendants CS(COMM) 546/2020 Page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:19.05.2022 10:31:12 are showing scant regard to the injunction order, it is deemed appropriate to issue bailable warrants against the promoters of the Defendants being Mr. Ajay Gupta and Mr. Vikas Gupta, F-119, Punjabi Basti, Baljeet Nagar Opp. Sitaram Park, New Delhi - 110008. The representative of the Plaintiff is permitted to visit the concerned police station and apprise the SHO concerned of the order passed, so as to ensure that bailable warrants are served upon the said persons and are executed. The surety amount is Rs.20,000/- qua each of the Defendants.
7. The concerned SHO shall also take into custody all the infringing products which were inventoried by the Local Commissioner and were returned to the Defendants on superdari. The said products shall be handed over by the SHO to the Plaintiff for safe custody, till further orders of this Court.
8. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that the entity- JPW Mobile Accessories- was impleaded as Defendant No.3 vide previous order dated 27th January, 2022, and the interim order may also be made applicable to the said entity. In the facts of the present case, this Court deems it fit to extend the injunction order dated 11th December, 2020 to the said entity/Defendant No.3, as well. Ordered accordingly.
9. List on 26th August, 2022.
10. Copy of this order be served upon the SHO, Police Station, Anand Parbat, New Delhi through the ld. Standing Counsel (Criminal), Mr. Sanjay Lao.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
MAY 17, 2022 dj/ms CS(COMM) 546/2020 Page 3 of 3