Delhi High Court Ex-Parte Restrains Saksham Trading Company From Using “Yatra' And 'YS' In E-Vehicles Business
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anish Dayal held that restrained Saksham Trading Company from using 'Yatra', 'YS', and any other marks resembling or deceptively similar to the YC Electric Vehicles marks 'Yatri' and 'YC' in E-Rickshaws, E-Vehicles, parts, accessories, and related goods. The bench held that: “Balance of convenience lies in favour of plaintiff, and they...
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Anish Dayal held that restrained Saksham Trading Company from using 'Yatra', 'YS', and any other marks resembling or deceptively similar to the YC Electric Vehicles marks 'Yatri' and 'YC' in E-Rickshaws, E-Vehicles, parts, accessories, and related goods.
The bench held that:
“Balance of convenience lies in favour of plaintiff, and they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the injunction, as prayed for, is not granted.”
Brief Facts:
YC Electric Vehicles (“Plaintiff”) approached the Delhi High Court ('High Court”) and filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for permanent injunction to restrain Saksham Trading Company (“Defendant”).
The Plaintiff, a partnership established in 2014, argued that it is as a prominent manufacturer of Electric Vehicles. It claimed that it conceived and adopted the trademarks 'YATRI' and 'YC' specifically for E-Rickshaws. Additionally, the Plaintiff obtained certification from the International Centre for Automotive Technology (ICAT).
The Plaintiff contended that the Defendant replicated the Plaintiff's trademarks, 'Yatri' and 'YC', through the adoption of the contested marks 'Yatra' and 'YS'.
Furthermore, the Plaintiff argued that despite issuing a cease-and-desist notice to the Defendant, followed by reminders, the Defendant persisted in infringing activities. The Defendant not only failed to respond but also attempted to sell their products bearing the impugned marks through the Plaintiff's dealer and submitted additional trademark applications similar to the Plaintiff's marks.
Observations by the High Court:
The High Court held that the Plaintiff established a prima facie case which warranted the grant of an ex-parte ad interim injunction until the subsequent hearing. It held that the Plaintiff convincingly demonstrated the likelihood of suffering irreparable harm if the injunction sought is not granted.
The High Court held that the Defendant's actions indicated a clear infringement of the Plaintiff's established trademarks, 'Yatri' and 'YC', through the adoption and use of the contested marks 'Yatra' and 'YS'. It held that these marks were identical or deceptively similar and were utilized in connection with similar goods and services.
Therefore, the High Court granted that the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant. Until the next hearing date, the Defendant and all associated parties were restrained from utilizing the impugned marks 'Yatra', 'YS', or any other marks resembling or containing the Olaintiff's marks, directly or indirectly, in connection with their business activities pertaining to the specified goods and services. Additionally, the Defendant was directed to remove all social media links and websites facilitating the sale of its goods under the impugned marks.
Case Title: Yc Electric Vehicles Vs Saksham Trading Company
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 680
Case Number: CS(COMM) 442/2024, I.A. 30467/2024, I.A. 30468/2024, I.A. 30469/2024 & I.A. 30470/2024
Advocate for the Plaintiff: Mr. Neeraj Grover, Mr. Yatin Chadha, Mr. Mayank Chadha, Mr. Gurvinder Singh, Ms. Shikha Sagar and Ms. Dolly Luthra and Ms. Ekta Mahendra, Advocates.
Advocate for the Respondent: None