Delhi High Court Expands ‘JAQUAR’ Crackdown, Freezes Bank Accounts And Suspends Rogue Franchise Domains
Delhi High Court Expands ‘JAQUAR’ Crackdown, Freezes Bank Accounts And Suspends Rogue Franchise Domains
Introduction
The Delhi High Court has extended an earlier ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Jaquar And Company Private Limited, restraining 19 newly impleaded entities from using the trademark “JAQUAR” or any deceptively similar variation. The Court also directed suspension of infringing domain names and freezing of certain bank accounts allegedly opened in a deceptively similar corporate name.
Factual Background
Jaquar And Company Private Limited, a manufacturer of bathroom fittings and sanitaryware, is the registered proprietor of the well-known trademark “JAQUAR”, declared as a well-known mark on February 19, 2024. In November 2025, the Court recorded that certain defendants had registered and operated domain names such as jaquarfranchise.com and jaquardealership.com, offering fake dealership and franchise opportunities under the “JAQUAR” brand.
The Court had observed that such conduct demonstrated “mala fide and deliberate infringement” intended to misuse the plaintiff’s goodwill, mislead the public, and unlawfully profit from its reputation.
Procedural Background
On November 3, 2025, the Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against Defendants No. 1 to 5. Subsequently, on February 10, 2026, Justice Jyoti Singh allowed impleadment of 22 additional entities. Upon consideration, similar injunctive relief was extended against 19 of the newly impleaded parties.
Issues
1. Whether the newly impleaded defendants were engaged in prima facie infringement of the “JAQUAR” trademark.
2. Whether extension of ex-parte ad-interim injunction was warranted.
3. Whether directions to domain registrars and banks for suspension and disclosure were justified.
Contentions of the Parties
Plaintiff: The mark “JAQUAR” is a well-known trademark enjoying statutory protection. Defendants were operating rogue domain names and offering fraudulent franchise and dealership schemes. The acts amounted to deliberate infringement and passing off. Immediate protective relief was necessary to prevent further public deception and reputational harm.
Defendants: Certain defendants entered appearance through counsel. They were granted time to file replies. No detailed defence was recorded at this interim stage.
Reasoning and Analysis
The Court found that the newly impleaded parties were prima facie using the “JAQUAR” mark or deceptively similar variations in domain names, trade names, and corporate identities. Given the prior finding of deliberate infringement and fraudulent intent in the earlier order, the Court considered it appropriate to extend interim protection. The restraint was made applicable to use of the mark:
- As part of domain names;
- As trademarks or service marks;
- As corporate or trading styles;
- In relation to any goods or services, whether online or offline.
Recognising the increasing misuse of well-known marks through rogue websites and fraudulent dealership schemes, the Court also issued ancillary directions to preserve evidence and prevent further financial harm. The concerned domain name registrar and hosting entities were directed to lock and suspend domain names such as jaquarfranchise.in and jaquarbusiness.com and disclose subscriber details in a password-protected format or sealed cover.
Further, Indian Bank, Punjab National Bank and IDBI Bank Ltd were directed to freeze bank accounts opened in the name “Jaguar And Company Private Limited” and furnish complete KYC details and transaction statements. The Court also granted liberty to Jaquar to approach the Registrar for extension of similar directions against additional rogue entities.
Decision
The Delhi High Court:
- Extended the ex-parte ad-interim injunction to 19 newly impleaded entities;
- Restrained them from using “JAQUAR” or any deceptively similar mark;
- Directed suspension and disclosure of infringing domain names;
- Ordered freezing of specified bank accounts and production of KYC details;
- Granted defendants four weeks to file replies.
The matter is listed before the Joint Registrar on April 7, 2026 and returnable before the Court on April 13, 2026.
In this case the plaintiff was represented by Kapil Wadhwa and Anish Jandial, Advocates. Meanwhile the defendant was represented by Advocates Kruttika Vijay, Geetanjali Visvanathan and Shivansh Tiwari for D-7. CGSC Arunima Dwivedi with Advocates Monalisha Pradhan and Priya Khurana for D-9 and D-10. Advocates Pradyumn Sharma and Shivani Choudhary for D-28.
