Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. Plaintiff shall file original, legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.

9. Disposed of I.A. 10307/2024 (seeking exemption from advance service to Defendant No.1)

10. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant No. 1 is perpetrating fraud on the general public by creating a false association with the Plaintiff, resulting in grave financial losses to the public. Defendant No. 1 is/are an unknown person(s) whose identity(ies) cannot be ascertained by the Plaintiff and accordingly have been impleaded as John Doe(s). Considering the nature of controversy involved in the present suit as well as the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, exemption from effecting advance service on Defendant No. 1 is allowed.

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 10/05/2024 at 22:16:21 website were original photographs of the Plaintiff's hotels. 20.8. Defendant No. 1 is/are an unknown person(s), who contact unwary customers though the impugned websites. Since the Plaintiff is unable to ascertain the identity(ies) of such unknown person(s), they have been impleaded as John Doe(s)6. Defendants No. 2 and 3 are Domain Name Registrars of the domains associated to the impugned webistes. The modus operandi of the fraud perpetuated through the impugned websites, is to display genuine photographs of the Plaintiff's hotels and offer booking/reservations of rooms under the guise of the reservations being booked on the official website of the Plaintiff. Though the identity of Defendant No. 1 cannot be ascertained by the Plaintiff, it is noticed that the impugned websites mention certain phone numbers7, through which reservation requests can be made. Further, some of the impugned websites are only skeleton websites which permit the users to book a room only by contacting the impugned phone numbers. Once an unsuspecting customer makes a room booking request, by contacting the said phone numbers, Defendant No. 1 would request certain payments on account of 'reservation charges' on certain UPI IDs or request them to share sensitive banking information including One Time Passwords8, card details, email addresses, etc. Once such sensitive information is shared, substantial amounts of money are siphoned off from the customer's bank accounts. 20.9. The infringing activities are further perpetuated by Defendant No. 1's unauthorised use the Plaintiff's trademarks, as part of the domain names, webistes, social media handle names, email addresses etc. which is solely Hereinafter, any reference to "Defendant No. 1" refers to unknown person(s) who have been impleaded as John Does.