Delhi High Court Imposes ₹50K Costs On Kashmir Harvard Educational Institute In Appeal Against Harvard College

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal against a single judge order which upheld an arbitral award directing transfer of a domain name registered by Kashmir Harvard Educational Institute based in Srinagar to the President and Fellows of Harvard College in the United States of America.

A division bench comprising Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju rejected the appeal moved by the Institute with costs of Rs. 50,000.

The court observed that the appeal was unmerited and noted that the impugned arbitral award has been rendered in an international commercial arbitration as the complainant, Harvard College, is not an Indian national nor an association nor a body which is incorporated in India.

“…and therefore, the ground of patent illegality under Section 34(2A) of the A&C Act is not available to the appellant. However, even if the same was available, we are unable to accept that the impugned award is vitiated on the ground of patent illegality,” the court said.

Notably, the single judge had also dismissed with Rs. 50,000 costs the plea moved by the Kashmir based educational institution against the arbitral award passed on March 04, 2023, under the “.IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy” (IDNDRP).

The domain name “kashmirharvard.edu.in” was registered by Kashmir Harvard Educational Institute. A complaint was submitted to NIXI by the President and Fellows of Harvard College seeking transfer or cancellation of the domain name.

The complaint claimed that Harvard has established a Harvard trademark programme, under which it enforces and licenses its trademarks described as the “HARVARD Marks”. It was mentioned that Harvard operates a website “www.harvard.edu” and social media accounts which include the name “Harvard”.

Rejecting the appeal, the division bench said that a plain reading of the impugned arbitral award indicated that it wS based on relevant material.

“In so far as the evidence regarding the respondent's defense is concerned, the appellant had not participated in the proceedings or furnished any documents. Thus, at this stage, cannot raise any grievance in this regard,” the court said.

Furthermore, the bench said that the contention of the Institute that it had not received the hard copy of the complaint was clearly an afterthought. It said that no such protest was raised after the receipt of the impugned award.

“The appellant's petition before the learned Single Judge also does not assail the impugned award on the ground of non-receipt of the hard copy of the complaint as required under Rule 3(d) of the Rules,” the court said.

The single judge had rejected the plea observing that there were no grounds to hold that the impugned arbitral award was contrary to Section 34(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

“In fact, the arguments advanced by the petitioner show a scant regard for the limited scope of intervention with an award in an international commercial arbitration, or for the process of the Court. Pleas have been advanced which are contrary to the record, and attempt after attempt has been made to mislead the Court. I, therefore, consider this to be a fit case for imposition of costs against the petitioner,” the single judge had said.

Title: KASHMIR HARVARD EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE v. PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 522

Click Here To Read Order