- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
Delhi High Court Restrains Sale of Counterfeit 'Chicnutrix' Products, Directs Meesho to Block Infringing Listings
Delhi High Court Restrains Sale of Counterfeit 'Chicnutrix' Products, Directs Meesho to Block Infringing Listings
Introduction
The Delhi High Court has passed an interim order restraining 11 online companies and sellers from selling counterfeit products bearing the trademark 'Chicnutrix' or a deceptively similar mark. The court was hearing a plea by Fullife Healthcare Pvt Ltd, the registered trademark owner.
Factual Background
Fullife Healthcare Pvt Ltd approached the court seeking a permanent injunction to restrain infringement of their registered trademark 'Chicnutrix'. The company alleged that the defendants were manufacturing, selling, and promoting counterfeit products using their trademark.
Issues
- Whether the defendants are infringing on Fullife Healthcare's registered trademark 'Chicnutrix'?
- Whether the e-commerce platform Meesho is liable for permitting the listing of infringing products?
Contentions of the Parties
Plaintiff's Contentions: Fullife Healthcare argued that the defendants were selling counterfeit products using their registered trademark 'Chicnutrix', causing harm to their reputation and goodwill.
Defendant's Contention: The defendants did not appear in court to contest the allegations.
Reasoning and Analysis
The bench of Justice Tejas Karia found prima facie evidence of trademark infringement and passed an interim order restraining the defendants from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or promoting counterfeit products bearing the 'Chicnutrix' trademark.
Decision
The Delhi High Court directed:
- The defendants are restrained from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or promoting counterfeit products bearing the 'Chicnutrix' trademark.
- Meesho to take down, block, or suspend 21 URLs listing infringing products within 72 hours.
- Meesho to disclose the details of the infringing sellers, including contact numbers, addresses, and GST details, within two weeks.
Implications
The judgment highlights the court's willingness to protect registered trademarks and prevent counterfeiting. It also emphasizes the responsibility of e-commerce platforms to ensure that their platforms are not used for infringing activities.



