Delhi High Court Imposes Rs. 20 Lakh Costs On Instant Bollywood Founder, Protects Joint IP Rights Pending Adjudication

Delhi High Court Imposes Rs. 20 Lakh Costs On Instant Bollywood Founder, Protects Joint IP Rights Pending Adjudication

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of ₹20 lakh on the founder of Instant Bollywood, Mandeep Singh, for suppressing material facts in a trademark dispute concerning ownership and assignment of the “Instant Bollywood” trademarks. While censuring the petitioner’s conduct, the Court nonetheless protected his admitted intellectual property rights by directing maintenance of status quo on the impugned trademark assignment.

Factual Background

Instant Bollywood is a digital entertainment and Bollywood news platform launched in 2012. In June 2019, Mandeep Singh entered into an agreement with One Digital Entertainment Pte. Ltd. (ODE) for management and development of the platform. The agreement expressly recognised joint ownership of intellectual property rights in the brand in a 50:50 ratio.

The trademarks, however, were later registered exclusively in the name of Shabir Momin, Managing Director of ODE. In October 2025, these trademarks were assigned by Momin to Times Internet Inc., without Singh being a party to the transaction or receiving any consideration.

Procedural Background

Singh filed a batch of rectification petitions before the Delhi High Court seeking cancellation of four registrations of the Instant Bollywood (device) mark. During the proceedings, Times Internet sought impleadment, asserting rights under the assignment dated October 24, 2025.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora allowed impleadment and proceeded to examine interim applications and the petitioner’s conduct in prosecuting the rectification proceedings.

Issues

1. Whether the petitioner had suppressed material facts relating to his prior knowledge of trademark registrations.

2. Whether such suppression warranted dismissal of interim relief.

3. Whether interim protection was required to safeguard the petitioner’s admitted intellectual property rights.

4. Whether costs ought to be imposed for abuse of process.

Contentions of the Parties

The petitioner contended that the trademarks were wrongfully registered and assigned without recognising his 50% ownership under the 2019 agreement. He sought cancellation of the registrations and interim protection.

The respondents argued that Singh had suppressed material facts, including documents and correspondence demonstrating that he was aware as early as 2022 that the trademarks stood in Shabir Momin’s name. They relied on the 2019 agreement and legal notices, including a notice dated November 24, 2025, to establish such knowledge. Times Internet submitted that it was a bona fide assignee and a necessary party to the proceedings.

Reasoning and Analysis

The Court found that Singh had failed to disclose crucial documents demonstrating his prior knowledge of the trademark registrations and the assignment process. This non-disclosure amounted to suppression of material facts, warranting serious censure.

However, the Court declined to dismiss Singh’s interim applications outright. It noted that the 2019 agreement and contemporaneous documents prima facie acknowledged joint ownership of intellectual property rights in the Instant Bollywood brand.

The Court observed that Singh was neither a signatory to the assignment documents nor had he received any consideration. In such circumstances, the exclusion of Singh from the registration and assignment process required explanation by the respondents.

Balancing equities, the Court held that while Singh’s conduct justified imposition of exemplary costs, denial of interim protection would risk irreparable prejudice to his admitted rights.

Decision

The Delhi High Court imposed costs of ₹5 lakh in each of the four petitions, aggregating to Rs. 20 lakh, payable to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks. The HC directed maintenance of status quo with respect to the assignment of the Instant Bollywood trademarks and restrained Shabir Momin and Times Internet from creating any third-party interests in the trademarks and clarified that the findings were prima facie in nature. The matter is next listed on May 6, 2026.

In this case the petitioner was represented by Ms. Swathi Sukumar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Nikhil Chawla, Ms. Mansha Mehta, Ms. Arshiya Chauhan, Mr. Ritik Raghuwanshi and Ms. Tejasvini Puri, Advocates.