Court Issues Ex Parte Injunction Against M/s D.R. Kuppraj Tex India for Using Deceptively Similar Marks
In a significant development, the Delhi High Court, presided by Justice Jyoti Singh, has granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Jockey International Inc., a leading global manufacturer and distributor of comfort apparel. The order restrains M/s D.R. Kuppraj Tex India and other defendants from using marks deceptively similar to Jockey's well-known trademark.
The plaintiff, Jockey International Inc., initiated the suit to protect its registered trademark "JOCKEY," alleging that the defendants were selling products under the brand names JOYKE, JOYSKY, and other similar marks on various online platforms, including Meesho. Jockey contended that these actions were likely to cause confusion among consumers and amounted to trademark infringement and passing off.
Justice Jyoti Singh, upon reviewing the evidence and arguments presented, concluded that the plaintiff established a prima facie case for the grant of an interim injunction. The court observed that the impugned marks were deceptively similar to JOCKEY and were being used for identical products, which could lead to consumer confusion. It was noted that the balance of convenience favored Jockey, and irreparable harm would ensue if the injunction was not granted.
The court's order restrains the defendants from manufacturing, marketing, or selling any goods under the impugned marks, including JOYKE and JOYSKY, until the next hearing. Additionally, Defendant No. 5, an online platform, has been directed to block and suspend the infringing URLs within 36 hours and provide Jockey with the KYC and transaction details of the defendants within four weeks.
Jockey International Inc. has a long history of protecting its trademark rights globally, with registrations in over 150 countries. The company's legal representatives, Mr. Saif Khan, Mr. Shobhit Agrawal, and Ms. Diya Viswanath, successfully argued that the defendants’ actions were in bad faith and continued despite a prior legal notice.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for September 24, 2026. Meanwhile, the plaintiff is required to comply with the procedural requirements under Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure within two weeks.
Bottom line:-
Trademark Law - Grant of ex parte ad interim injunction to protect trademark rights - Use of deceptively similar marks amounts to trademark infringement and passing off - Restraint imposed on defendants and directive to block infringing URLs within stipulated time.
Statutory provision(s): Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2), Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Jockey International Inc v. M/s D.R. Kuppraj Tex India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2914204
