In the case of M/s. Anand And Anand vs. John Does & Ors., the Delhi High Court decided an interim application seeking a permanent injunction against unidentified defendants engaging in the unauthorized use of the plaintiff’s well-known trademarks and the name of its Managing Partner. The defendants, operating under pseudonyms were sending fraudulent emails impersonating the plaintiff, thereby infringing the plaintiff’s trademark “ANAND AND ANAND” and the firm’s associated goodwill.
The court, upon reviewing the evidence and submissions, acknowledged that the plaintiff had established a strong prima facie case for trademark infringement, passing off, and copyright violation. The court noted that the fraudulent activities were not only likely to deceive the public but also posed a significant risk to the plaintiff’s reputation. Given the potential for irreparable harm, the court granted an interim injunction in favour of Anand And Anand.
The injunction directed the defendants to immediately cease using the plaintiff’s registered trademarks, particularly “ANAND AND ANAND,” and the name of its Managing Partner in any manner that could cause confusion or deception. The court further ordered the blocking and blacklisting of the email addresses used by the defendants, with instructions to service providers to disclose the identities and contact details of the individuals operating these accounts. Additionally, the court permitted the plaintiff to publish a public notice to warn the public of the fraudulent activities and the ongoing legal proceedings.
General Note
Cybercriminals have been increasingly targeting law firms through fraudulent emails and notices, posing as legitimate representatives to deceive clients and associates. These criminals engage in a range of illegal activities designed to wrongfully gain financial benefits. Some associates and clients, believing these emails to be genuine, have unfortunately made payments to these bad actors. While cybercrime complaints are often filed, law enforcement response can be slow, leaving firms to pursue civil suits to protect themselves and their clients.
At BananaIP, we urge our associates, clients, and third parties to remain vigilant against such cybercrimes. Before taking any action on unsolicited communications, please ensure you perform the necessary checks. These can include verifying the domain name of the email sender, making a quick phone call to the firm to confirm the legitimacy of the communication, and reviewing the content carefully. Simple steps like these can prevent falling victim to such schemes.
For more guidance on how to verify the authenticity of emails, please refer to this useful resource from UC Davis: How to Verify the Authenticity of an Email.
Citation: Ms. Anand And Anand v. John Does & Ors., CS(COMM) 692/2024 (H.C. Delhi Aug. 14, 2024).
Disclaimer
The case note/s in this blog post have been written by IP Attorneys at BananaIP Counsels based on their review and understanding of the Judgments. It may be noted that other IP attorneys and experts in the field may have different opinions about the cases or arrive at different conclusions therefrom. It is advisable to read the Judgments before making any decisions based on the case notes.
If you have any questions, or if you wish to speak with an IP expert/attorney, please reach us at: contact@bananaip.com or 91-80-26860414/24/34.
