8 May 2023 2:58 PM GMT
The Bombay High Court last week temporarily restrained Meta Platforms and Ashok Kumar (unknown persons) from circulating a video regarding Patanjali’s Mahakosh Refined Soyabean Oil on Meta's online platforms Facebook and WhatsApp during the pendency of Patanjali's trademark infringement suit.Justice Manish Pitale held that Patanjali made out a strong prima facie case that the video...
The Bombay High Court last week temporarily restrained Meta Platforms and Ashok Kumar (unknown persons) from circulating a video regarding Patanjali’s Mahakosh Refined Soyabean Oil on Meta's online platforms Facebook and WhatsApp during the pendency of Patanjali's trademark infringement suit.
Justice Manish Pitale held that Patanjali made out a strong prima facie case that the video circulating on Facebook and WhatsApp infringed its registered trademarks and directed Meta to remove the URLs provided in Patanjali’s plaint.
“this Court is satisfied that prima facie the ingredients of Section 29(8) (a) and (c) of the aforesaid Act are made out. The contents of the video in question, available an the platform of Defendant No. 1 (Meta Platforms), prima facie appears to have infringed upon the registered trademark of the Plaintiff (Patanjali). A strong prima facie case is indeed made out for granting ad-interim reliefs in favour of the Plaintiff”, the court held.
Google opposed the prayer for temporary injunction against it, and Patanjali did not press it. Hence the ad-interim relief will operate only against Meta and persons who circulate the video on Facebook, WhatsApp etc.
Patanjali alleged that in April 2023 it came across a defamatory video circulating on Facebook that contained disparaging remarks against its edible oil Mahakosh. It claimed that Meta Platforms did not take any action to delete the videos and did not reply to Patanjali's cease and desist notices. Therefore, Patanjali filed a trademark infringement suit against Meta, Google, and unknown persons before the Bombay High Court and sought ad-interim reliefs during the pendency of the suit.
The video not only infringes its trademarks but also spreads misleading and false information and creates false impression regarding the product in the minds of the public, Patanjali contended. It alleged that a particular community has been targeted to spread misinformation and disparaging information about its products with the call to boycott them.
Patanjali submitted that it has registration for word mark “MAHAKOSH” and a device mark since 1998. Further, it has substantial goodwill over the registered trademarks and for the past 10 years its turnover is Rs. 55,35,068 Crores, Patanjali claimed.
The court concluded that plaintiff made out a strong prima facie case of infringement under section 29(8)(a) and 29(8)(c) of the Trademarks Act, 1999. Patanjali will suffer grave and irreparable loss unless ad-interim relief is not granted and hence the balance of convenience lies in its favour, the court held.
Advocates Prathamesh Kamat, Nakul Jain, Kayush and Apoorv Srivastava represented Patanjali while Advocates Shailesh Poria, Hrishikesh Shukla, Rahul G represented Google.
Case no. – Interim Application (Lodging) No. 12496 of 2023 In Commercial IP Suit (Lodging) No. 12374 of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 245
Case Title – Patanjali Foods Limited v. Meta Platforms Inc & Ors
Click Here To Read/Download Order