IN THE MATTERS OF:-

1.DABUR INDIA LIMITED …..Plaintiff

Versus

ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS …..Defendants

2.TATA SKY LIMITED …..Plaintiff

Versus

S G ENTERPREISES – TATA SKY SALES AND SERVICES AND ORS. ….. Defendants

3.COLGATE PALMOLIVE COMPANY & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

NIXI & ANR. ….. Defendants

4.MOTHER DAIRY FRUIT & VEGETABLE PVT. LTD…… Plaintiff

Versus

KUMAR PRAHLAD & ANR. ….. Defendants

5.ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED & ANR. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

WWW.ULTRATECHCEMENTS.COM & ORS. ….. Defendants

6.MONTBLANC SIMPLO GMBH ….. Plaintiff

Versus

MONTBLANCINDIA.COM & ORS. ….. Defendants

7.JOCKEY INTERNATIONAL INC. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

WWW.JOCKEYFRANCHISE.COM & ORS. ….. Defendants

8.INDIAMART INTERMESH LIMITED …. Plaintiff

Versus

MR. AKASH VERMA & ORS. ….. Defendants

9.MCDONALDS CORPORATION & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA & ORS. …Defendants

10.ITC LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

ASHOK KUMAR & ORS. ….. Defendants

11. SHOPPERS STOP LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

M/S SHOPPERSTOP & ORS. ….. Defendants

12.MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

PCPATCHERS TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED

13. THE HIMALAYA DRUG COMPANY & ORS. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

ASHOK KUMAR & ORS. ….. Defendants

14. GODREJ PROPERTIES LTD ….. Plaintiff

Versus

ASHOK KUMAR & ANR. ….. Defendants

15. SNAPDEAL PRIVATE LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

GODADDYCOM LLC AND ORS ….. Defendants

16.MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

TECH HERACLES OPC PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. ….. Defendants

17. TATA SONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

M/S ELECTRO INTERNATIONAL & ORS. ….. Defendants

18. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

NITIN KUMAR SINGH & ORS. ….. Defendants

19. KAMDHENU LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

RAGHUNATH VIRDHARAM BISHNOI AND ORS. …. Defendants

20. HT MEDIA LTD ….. Plaintiff

Versus

POOJA SHARMA & ORS. ….. Defendants

21. KAJARIA CERAMICS LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

GODADDY.COM LLC & ORS. ….. Defendant

22. MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

VACATION RENTAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
& ORS. ….. Defendants

23.BAJAJ FINACE LTD & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

NIKO DAS & ANR. ….. Defendants

24. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

UNILEVERR1.IN & ORS. ….. Defendants

25. AMAZON SELLER SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

AMAZONBUYS.IN & ORS. ….. Defendants

26. FASHNEAR TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

MEESHO ONLINE SHOPPING PVT. LTD. & ANR. ….. Defendants

27. GUJARAT COOPERATIVE MILK MARKETING FEDERATION
LTD & ANR. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

AMUL-FRANCHISE.IN & ORS. ….. Defendant

28. BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

REGISTRANT OF WWW.BAJAJ-FINSERVE.ORG & ORS. ….. Defendants

29. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ….. Plaintiff

Versus

WWW.XIAOMI-INDIA.XYZ & ORS. ….. Defendants

30. BURGER KING CORPORATION ….. Plaintiff

Versus

SWAPNIL PATIL & ORS. ….. Defendants

31.INFINITI RETAIL LIMITED ….. Plaintiff

Versus

M/S CROMA WHOLESELLER & ORS. ….. Defendants

32. CRESSET CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC & ANR. ….. Plaintiffs

Versus

REGISTRANT OF WWW.CRESSETCAPITAL.IN ,
WWW.CRESSETINDIALIVE.LIVE & ORS. ….. Defendants

Date of Order:- 27.09.2023

These 32 batch matters were clubbed togethert in relation to domain names being registered by unknown third parties infringing trademark right of various brand owners and implementation of court orders by the Domain Name Registrars (‘DNR’). From time to time, various directions were passed by Delhi High Court in respect of blocking and locking of the infringing domain names, and implementation of court orders by various DNRs which may or may not be located in India.

On this date, Delhi Police placed on record a written note of arguments in respect of the challenges faced by the Cyber Cell of the Delhi Police in investigation. The said challenges are as under:
i. Delay by Banks in replying to emails and information sought
by the Cyber Cell.
ii. Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) and intermediaries who are hosting the website not providing proper details of the
Registrants in respect of cloud services and other services
availed by them.
iii. Use of VOIP,VPN, etc. by fraudsters to avoid detection.
iv. Non-providing of information by Google even though fake
websites have booked AdWords through Google Ads
programme.

Notices to Banks by Delhi High Court was issued after the stand of the Cyber Cell, Delhi Police to the nominated counsels of all the banks who were nominated by Delhi High Court, so as to evolve a method for ensuring that queries by the police authorities are replied to in a diligent and efficient manner, as
it involved innocent customers being duped of substantial sums of money.

Google LLC was directed to nominate one official who would communicate with the Cyber Cell, Delhi Police and provide them the information that they would need in respect of the fraudulent websites and render any other cooperation that may be needed to investigate the cases.

In CS(COMM)-303/2022, Delhi police Counsel submits that the request has been sent for information from Mumbai Police as on 19th September, 2023. Status report was of that infortmation was asked to be placed on record by the Hon’ble Court.

Next date in these matters now is 24th November, 2023.

Read, Reveiwed & Edited by

Neeraj Gogia, Advocate

9891800100

[email protected]

You Missed