HT Media vs Navneet Chaturvedi

DA-2

IN TIII] TIIGII COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

HCIDA2 Dasti From

N.D.O.H;-

The Registrar General, Delhi Iligh Court,

15

.09.2014 Before court

New Delhi. 'l'o,

Mr. Saikrishna Rajagopal, Advocatc (Counsel for the Plaintiff) A-28, CMA Towcr, Sector -24,

Noida

- 201 301

Sub: CS (OS) 188312014 M/s IIl'Media Lirnited & Anr. V/s Navneet Chaturv'edi & Anr.

Plaintiff Defendant

Sir.

I am directed to forward herewith for information and necessary compliance. a copy of order dated 02.07.2014 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan Singh of this Cour1. A copy of Memo of parties is also enclosed herewith.

Administrative Offi cer(J )( O-DA2) for Registrar General

lk Encls:

(l) A copy of

order dated 02.07.2014 passed by

Singh of this Court.

(2) A copy of Memo of Parties.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan

ptraintiffs Versus Navneet Chafurvedi & Anr.

Defendants

MEMO OF PARTIES

L.

nals

HT Media Limited

Hindustan Times House 78-20,K.6. Mar& New Delhi _ 110 001

...plaintiff No.1

2. NI/s Hindustan Times Ltd. Hindustan Times House, Floor., lg_20,11.6.

Mar& New Delhi_110 001 9th

'1..

...plaintiff No.2 Versus

Navneet Chafurvedi

Gali No. 7, Mahipalpur

New Delhi-170027 ...Defendant No.1

2. Hindustan Times Online Second Floor, L_204, Street No. 7C, Mahipalpur,

New Dethi

New

Delhi

Date:!

...DefendantNo.2

)l's z"lntz

Saikrishnu,&,{"rociates :une,2014

Advocates for the plaintiffs A-2E, CMA Tower, Sector_24

Noida-201301 9810621,272

$-2s *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI cs(os) r883t20r4 IWS HT MEDIA LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Saikrishna Raj agopal, Adv. with Ms.Savni Dutt, Adv" versus

NAVNEET CI{ATURVEDI & ANR

..... Defendants

Through None.

CORAM:

IION'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

ORDER

o

02.07.2014

I.A. No. 1 17 20 120X,4 & I.A.

No.

1, 1.

72 1/20

l4(exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

The applications are disposed of.

CS(OS) No. 1883/2014

Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

Issue summons to the defendants, on

filing of process fee and Regd.

A.D..Covers within one week, retumable on 20tr August,2014.

Notice for the date fixed.

The case of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs are amongst the leading

media houses

in India

engaged

in print media, radio, intemet etc. The

ptaintiffs are the parent entrty with its business extending in various fields but for the purposes of this suit, the plaintiffs are principally engaged in the business

of

publication

of newspapers 'HINDUSTAN TIMES. The

plaintiffs' newspapers have established their presence as pioneers in the business with their editorial excellence and integrity.

At present, HINDUSTAN TTMES has an increased readership of over 3.7 million readers' lthe plaintiff No.2 has a prominent intemet presence through

its

websites www.hindustantimes.com amongst others, which news websites' The plaintiff No.2 is the owner registered in August,

1996.

is primarily

of the same which

a

was

The trade mark 'HINDUSTAN TIMES' has

been continuously and unintemrptedly used by the plaintiffs since the year

l92l

which has become extremely popular and well-known and is exclusively associated with the news publications pubtished by the plaintiffs. The trade mark HINUSTAN TIMES is a unique combination/ collocation of words in the English language thereby making the said trade

mark distinctive s)monymous

one. The said trade mark has therefore become

with the plaintiffs apart from having virtually become

household name

a

in India. Thus, use of the trade mark HINDUSTAN

TIME,S in connection with any goods or services clearly leads the members

of the public to infer that the source/origin of the said good/service is the plaintiffs only.

It is stated in the plaint that Hindustan Times is also the corporate name/trading style of the plaintiff No.2, The Hindustan Times Limited,

which was incorporated in the year 1924. In the year 2003, the Hindustan Times Limited transferred its media business including its news publication business to its subsidiary IWs HT Media

Limited. By virtue of

agreement

dated 15th August, 2003, the plaintiff No.1 is the subsequent proprietor of all

the intellectual property rights including in the trade mark "HINDUSTAN

TIMES". The HT Logo is a registered trade mark owned by the plaintiff

No.l. By virtue of distinctiveness

and prior, continuous, extensive and

significant use of the trade marks '6HT" and HT Logo, in respect of any product or services are known and associated by members of the public to be used by the

plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have established tremendous goodwill

and reputation in respect of the trade marks

'HINDUSTAN TIMES' and HT

on account of the high quality of news reporting. The details of

the

registered trade marks have been given in para 11 of the plaint.

The details of the revenue turnover for last three years have been given in para 13 of the plaint. The details of the expenses for the last three years have been given in para 13 of the plaint.

ih. d"f.ndants is that in the frrst

The case of the plaintiffs against

week of June, 2014, the plaintiffs came to know that a website providing

news in Hindi is being operated from the web domain www.hindustantimesonline.come. It appears to have been started on 1" April, 2014. The defendant website boasts of having a daily traffic of over 1,00,000 users including readership from minsters, bureaucrats, business people, professionals, students, academicians and scholars among several

others. The defendant website www.hindustantimesonline.com and its webpages are registered in the name of defendant No.1

.

The defendant No.

1

claims to be the Chief Editor of the defendant website. The defendant No.1

is

also believed to

be

using an

by which he

e-mail

id

communicates with

third parties as the Chief Editor.

According to the plaintiffs, defendant No.2, Hindustan Times Online, is a privately owned company with 51-200 employees. The defendants are

joined as parties in the instant suit as a common cause of action arises

against both the defendants and common reliefs are claimed against them.

The defendants are involved in the business of reporting news from India and abroad in Hindi. The defendants not only use a trade mark that is identical to the trade maTk "HNDUSTAN TIMES" which is registered trade mark of the plaintiff but also makes use of a mark identicatr to the plaintiffs' trade mark 66HT" and the HT Logo. They have used the trade marks identical to the plaintiffs' trade mark without the permission of the plaintiffs and the defendant have extended the illegal use of the

plaintiffs' trade marks

over various other social networking platforms, including Facebook, Twitter and Linkedtrn. Thereby the defendants are causing substantial harm to the

plaintiffs by misrepresenting to the target audience that the defendants' business is related to that of the plaintiffs.

The defendants are violating the plaintiffs' trade mark rights under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act,

1999. The unauthorized use of the

plaintiffs' trade marks "HINDUSTAN TIMES", HT Logo and HT by the defendants amounts to infringement of the plaintiffs' registered trade marks and passing

off its website/business

as having a connection/affiliation

with

the plaintiffs. The activities of the defendants are causing irreparable harm

and injury

to the plaintiffs.

HINDUSTAN

TIMES

They have adopted the trade

ONLINE

and

name

website

www.hindustantimesonline.com, in order to ride upon the immense goodwill and transitional reputation enjoyed by the plaintiffs and are confusing the

members

of the public and taking unfair advantage of

the repute

of the

plaintiffs' registered trade mark.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs has referred to various paras of the plaint as well as the documents placed on record.

After hearing the learned counsel for the plaintiff this court

is

satisfied that the plaintiffs have been able to make out a strong prima facie case

in their favour. In

case the interim order is not passed, the plaintiffs

will suffer irreparable loss and injury. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants. Since the plaintiffs are holding the registration of the trade mark HINDUSTAND TIMES, HT,

HT

logo, therefore, the strong prima facie case has been made in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants. The plaintiffs have also got the domain name registered in their favour namely www.hindustantimes.com and www.hindustantimes.in. Therefore, the defendants are not entitled to

use the domain name and website und,er the www.hindustantimesonline.com, their logo

name

or create any confusion or

deception in the trade.

Till the next date of hearing, the defendants, their principal officers, directors, agents, franchisees, servants and all others acting for and on its

behalf, are restrained from using the plaintiffs' registered trademarks "HINIDUSTAN TIMES, HT, HT logo and/or any other deceptive variant

including the plaintiffs' domain name www.hindustantimes.in,

in

hindustantimes.com,

any manner whatsoever, including but not

limited to I

in its domain name, u'ww.hindustantimesonline.corn; and

11

in or as part of its Facebook Profrle, named Hindustantimes Online.com, iocated at: the

IIRL at www.facebook.com/

hindustantimesonline and/or any other URL; and 111

in or as part of its Twitter handle, @HTONLINENEWS located at the

IIRL at www.twitter.com./HTonlinenews

andlor any other

URL; and

iv. in or as part of its Linkedln Profile HINDUSTANTIMES ONLINE, located at the URL www.linkedin.com/cornpany/ hindustantimes-online andlot any other URL; and

v. in or as part of its business e-mail IDs, including but not limited to

c

, t

)

; and

vi.

as part

of its news publications.

andlor doing any other actthat is likely to lead to infringement of the

plaintiffs' trademark and passing off.

Compliance of Order Dasti.

JULY 02,20ulik

fL

XXXIX Rule 3 CPC be made within

one week'