‘Jio’ Trademark Infringement: Bombay High Court Restrains Cab Operators
The Bombay High Court has passed an ad-interim injunction order in favour of Reliance Industries Limited (RIL),
By: : Kashish Singh
Update: 2025-10-09 11:15 GMT
‘Jio’ Trademark Infringement: Bombay High Court Restrains Cab Operators
Introduction
The Bombay High Court has passed an ad-interim injunction order in favour of Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), restraining a group of cab operators from using the 'Jio' trademark.
Factual Background
The cab operators were using the domain name www.jiocabs.com and a logo with the name 'Jio' for their taxi services in Dehradun and Delhi. RIL claimed that this was a trademark infringement and filed a suit against the cab operators.
Procedural Background
RIL filed a suit before the Bombay High Court, challenging the cab operators' use of the 'Jio' trademark. The Court considered RIL's application for an ad-interim injunction, seeking to restrain the cab operators from using the trademark pending the suit.
Contentions of the Parties
Plaintiff: The cab operators' use of the 'Jio' name and artwork was deceptively similar to RIL's trademark, causing grave injury to the company.
Defendants: The defendants did not appear before the High Court, but seemed to have changed their name and website content after being served with the suit.
Reasoning and Analysis
The bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan observed that various previous judgments had dealt with the 'Jio' name as a subject matter of protection as a well-known trademark of RIL. The Court held that RIL had made a strong prima facie case to substantiate its claims of trademark infringement.
Decision
The Bombay High Court restrained the defendants and other cab operators from offering or rendering taxi services or any other goods or services through the website www.jiocabs.com or using the Jio name or any mark or label deceptively similar to it. The matter is listed for hearing on November 28, 2025.
Implications
The judgment highlights the importance of protecting well-known trademarks and the potential consequences of trademark infringement.
In this case the plaintiff was represented by Mr. A. Bhagat, Advocate.