Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Injunction Protecting Beverly Hills Polo Club Logo, Restrains Arvi Tex for Trademark Infringement

Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Injunction Protecting Beverly Hills Polo Club Logo, Restrains Arvi Tex for Trademark Infringement

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Lifestyle Equities C.V. and its licensing arm, protecting the intellectual property rights associated with the globally recognized Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) logo.

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the plaintiffs had established a strong prima facie case of trademark infringement and that continued misuse of the mark would cause irreparable harm to their goodwill and reputation.

Factual Background

The Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) brand, established in 1982, is internationally known for apparel, accessories, perfumes, and lifestyle products. A distinctive feature of the brand is its iconic logo depicting a charging polo pony with a rider and mallet, which forms the core of its brand identity. The plaintiffs hold multiple trademark registrations in India dating back to 1992 and have continuously used the mark in the Indian market for over eighteen years.

In February 2026, the plaintiffs discovered that Bhaveshbhai Chaturbhai Nakrani, trading as Arvi Tex, was selling apparel products such as polo t-shirts using marks allegedly identical or deceptively similar to the BHPC logo through online platforms.

Procedural Background

The plaintiffs conducted a test purchase of the infringing products and found them to be of inferior quality. They subsequently issued a cease-and-desist notice dated February 19, 2026, which went unanswered. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed a suit before the Delhi High Court seeking injunction against the defendant for trademark infringement, passing off, and related reliefs. The matter came up for consideration of interim relief.

Issues

1. Whether the defendant’s use of marks similar to the BHPC logo constituted trademark infringement.

2. Whether the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case warranting grant of ex-parte ad-interim injunction.

3. Whether continued use of the impugned mark would cause irreparable harm to the plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation.

Contentions of the Parties

The plaintiffs contended that the BHPC logo enjoys substantial goodwill and reputation globally and in India, supported by long-standing use, registrations, and significant sales and promotional expenditure.

They argued that the defendant’s use of nearly identical marks was a deliberate attempt to mislead consumers and create a false association with the BHPC brand for commercial gain.

It was further submitted that the infringing products were of poor quality, which could tarnish the reputation of the plaintiffs’ brand.

The defendant did not appear at the interim stage to contest the application.

Reasoning and Analysis

The Court examined the material on record, including trademark registrations, sales figures, promotional expenditure, and evidence of infringing products. It observed that the BHPC logo possesses a unique and distinctive appearance, and that the plaintiffs had demonstrated long-standing use and substantial goodwill associated with the mark. The Court held that the similarity between the rival marks was likely to cause initial interest confusion, point-of-sale confusion, and post-sale confusion, thereby misleading consumers into believing that the defendant’s products were associated with the plaintiffs. It further observed that dilution of such a well-known mark could not be adequately compensated by monetary damages and would result in irreparable injury to the plaintiffs. Accordingly, the Court held that the balance of convenience lay in favour of the plaintiffs.

Decision

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Arvi Tex and all persons acting on its behalf from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or dealing in products bearing the infringing marks or any mark deceptively similar to the BHPC logo. The Court also directed the defendant to remove all infringing content from its website, social media platforms, and other digital channels. The matter has been listed before the Joint Registrar on May 15, 2026, and before the Court on September 16, 2026.

In this case Lifestyle Equities was represented by Advocates Sidhant Goel, Mohit Goel, Abhishek Kotnala, Kartikeya Tandon and Urvashi Singh.