The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Tommy Hilfiger vs. M/s. Taqua Textiles has recently granted a temporary injunction against a textile company that has infringed the trademark of Tommy Hilfiger for selling face masks. The plaintiff, Tommy Hilfiger, is a company based in the Netherlands. Plaintiff has acquired a formidable reputation internationally and has over 1600 retail stores in more than 115 countries. The defendants, M/s. Taqua Textiles and M/s. Shine India, are sole proprietorship concerns. The defendant no. 1 had advertised face masks with the flag logo of the plaintiff’s company on their website. The defendants have been selling their products on the web page of Indiamart. On further investigation it was also found that the defendant were selling many counterfeit products from numerous international brands. They had been using potential platforms like Indiamart, Facebook, Instagram etc., for advertising their products. The Plaintiff contended that the defendants had infringed the trademark of the plaintiff with the sole motive to confuse the minds of the consumers and thereby making undue profits.
The Hon’ble Court observed by considering the material placed on record that there has been an trademark infringement and granted an ad-interim exparte injunction against the defendants. The court also viewed that the plaintiff has made a prima facie case for granting an ad-interim injunction against the defendant and if the same was not granted then the plaintiff would be put to an irreplaceable loss. Thus, the Court directed the plaint to be registered as Suit and asked to issue summons in the suit and notice in the applications to the defendant.
As an advocate, one may encounter a situation when a Section 138 matter will be dismissed for Want of Prosecution. The idea is that no