Author: Angela Arora
In the matter of Rahul Mishra & Anr. v. John Doe & Anr. [CS (COMM) 1194/2024], the Delhi High Court, vide an order dated 24th December 2024, passed an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining John Doe Defendant No.1 from using the RAHUL MISHRA trademarks, and directed the Domain Name Registrar (Defendant No. 2) to lock and suspend Defendant No.1’s domain name.
The Plaintiffs own and operate the renowned luxury fashion label ‘RAHUL MISHRA’. In addition to selling clothes through their retail outlets, the Plaintiffs also carry on their business through their website www.rahulmishra.in, which showcases the Plaintiffs’ collections.
The Plaintiffs were aggrieved that the Defendant No. 1 was offering to sell counterfeits of the Plaintiffs’ dresses through its impugned website ‘www.rahuldress.com’ at substantially lower prices, and was also displaying the Plaintiffs’ trademark and images/photographs featuring the Plaintiffs’ designs on its own website to market its counterfeit products.
The Plaintiffs claimed that the images posted on their website constituted original artistic works under Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (“Copyright Act”) and that the Plaintiffs were entitled to exclusive rights over the said images by virtue of Section 14 of the Copyright Act. The Plaintiffs claimed that they also owned copyright in the design of the dresses, including their shape, configuration and surface pattern, as less than 50 units of such dresses were produced, and accordingly their rights remained unaffected under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act. It was also pointed out that the Plaintiff No. 1, i.e. the designer Rahul Mishra, owns trademark registrations for his name. The Plaintiffs argued that the Defendant No. 1’s actions amounted to, inter alia, trademark and copyright infringement.
Accepting the Plaintiffs’ claims, the Court held that, “the plaintiffs have been able to make out a prima facie case for the grant of an ex parte ad interim injunction, which is also a dynamic injunction…Disclosure orders are also liable to be passed against the defendant no.2…”
The matter is now listed for hearing on April 7, 2025.
Keywords: fashion law copyright in designs trademark infringement design piracy
