Mr. Sushant Singh and Mr. Sourav Pattanaik, Advocates v. ADHYATMIK TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD ORS

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2025 at 11:38:47 CS(COMM) 1100/2024 Page 1 of 4 $~84 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 1100/2024 DEVDARSHAN DHOOP INDUSTRIES & ANR. .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sushant Singh and Mr. Sourav Pattanaik, Advocates. versus ADHYATMIK TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Ms. Archana Sahadeva, Advocate for D-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH O R D E R % 23.05.2025 I.A. 13157/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. I.A. 13156/2025 (condonation of delay of 56 days in filing review petition) 3. This is an application filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs seeking condonation of delay of 56 days in filing the review petition. 4. Issue notice. 5. Ms. Archana Sahadeva, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of Defendant No. 1. 6. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed condoning delay of 56 days in filing the review petition. 7. Application stands disposed of. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2025 at 11:38:47 CS(COMM) 1100/2024 Page 2 of 4 REV. PET. 323/2025 8. This review petition is filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC, 1908 seeking review of the order dated 18.03.2025 to the extent detailed in the review petition. 9. Mr. Sushant Singh, learned counsel for the Plaintiffs submits that paragraph 1 of the order be modified in light of the fact that Plaintiffs have sought permanent injunction against the Defendants from providing services that include services relating to providing virtual worshipping/puja, visits/darshan of various temples under trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’ and related services as also from providing services under the said trademark in any manner whatsoever or doing any other thing as may be likely to cause confusion or deception amounting to passing off the goods/services and business of the Defendants as that of the Plaintiffs. The reliefs sought were not limited to violation of intellectual property rights but also in relation to specific performance of Settlement Agreement dated 12.08.2023. The argument is that while these reliefs have been correctly captured in paragraphs 3 to 7 of the order, however, reading of paragraph 1 of the order indicates as though Plaintiffs had restricted the relief of injunction to manufacturing, marketing, reproducing, printing or publishing, selling or offering for sale, dhoops, havan samagri, pooja samagri under the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’, which is not correct. It is further argued that Plaintiffs have not given up any reliefs of injunction and had merely conceded to restrict the monetary relief to nominal damages. 10. Issue notice. 11. Ms. Archana Sahadeva, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2025 at 11:38:47 CS(COMM) 1100/2024 Page 3 of 4 Defendant No. 1 and candidly does not object to the order being modified to the extent sought by the Plaintiffs. 12. Accordingly, paragraph 1 is modified and reference to the reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs will include the relief of injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against Defendant No. 1 qua services relating to providing virtual worshiping/puja, visits/darshan of the various temples under the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’ as also injunction from providing other services under the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’, in any manner whatsoever or doing any other thing as may be likely to cause confusion or deception amounting to passing off the goods/services and business of Defendant No. 1 as for those of the Plaintiffs. The reliefs as sought include a decree for specific performance of the Settlement Agreement dated 12.08.2023. 13. In light of the aforesaid modification, paragraph 17 of the order dated 18.03.2025 is modified and would read as under:- (a) Defendant No. 1 by itself and/or its partners, directors, employees or anyone acting on its behalf are restrained from manufacturing, marketing, reproducing, printing or publishing, selling or offering for sale goods under the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’ or any mark identical or deceptively similar thereto, amounting to infringement of Plaintiffs’ registered trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’ and/or passing off the goods as those of the Plaintiffs; (b) Defendant No. 1 by itself and/or its partners, directors, employees or anyone acting on its behalf are restrained from providing services, such as virtual worshiping/puja, visits/darshan of the various temples under the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’ or in any manner using the trademark or doing any other thing that may This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2025 at 11:38:47 CS(COMM) 1100/2024 Page 4 of 4 cause confusion or deception that the goods/services and/or business of Defendant No. 1 is that of the Plaintiffs; (c) Defendant No. 1 by itself and/or its partners, directors, employees or anyone acting on its behalf are restrained from in any manner using keywords or metatags which are associated with the trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’. (d) Defendant No. 1 is directed to abide by the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement dated 12.08.2023 in letter and spirt and shall remove all listings/social media posts in respect of the impugned trademark ‘DEVDARSHAN’. (e) Plaintiffs are entitled to nominal damages of Rs. 3.5 lacs from Defendant No. 1, which shall be paid within three months from the date of the order. 14. Registry is directed to draw up the decree sheet in the aforesaid terms. 15. Review petition is allowed and disposed of. JYOTI SINGH, J MAY 23, 2025/shivam