TIMES INTERNET LTD Vs. JUST FLOWERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff (Times Internet Limited) is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and belongs to the Times Group of Companies. The present suit was filed against the defendants seeking a permanent injunction restraining them from using the mark "eindiatimes" and a domain name of which "indiatimes" was a part. A decree was also sought for transfer of the domain name "eindiatimes.com" to the plaintiff and for recovery of damages to the extent of Rs 20 lacs.

(2.) ON 05.02.2004 this court had passed interim orders restraining the defendants from using the domain name "eindiatimes.com" or any other domain name which contained the mark ?indiatimes? or any other domain name which was similar to the plaintiff's domain name "indiatimes.com". After service of summons, the defendants appeared. On 12.07.2005 admission/denial of documents was completed. The issues were framed on 23.03.2006. The plaintiff had filed the evidence affidavit of Shri Manish Jain (PW-1) who is the Company Secretary of the plaintiff. However, the defendants had stopped appearing on and from 17.11.2006 when the matter had been fixed for cross examination of this witness. The plaintiff's documents had been marked as Exhibits PW1/1 to PW1/11. The defendants were directed to be proceeded against ex parte by virtue of an order dated 09.10.2007.

(3.) SINCE the averments made in the plaint are supported by the evidence of PW1 who has filed the said affidavit and the same is uncontroverted, the case of the plaintiff stands proved. The plaintiff's case is that it is the proprietor of the mark "indiatimes" as well as of the domain name ly"indiatimes.com". The defendants have adopted the mark "eindiatimes" and have got the domain name "eindiatimes.com" registered in their name which are deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff's mark and domain name. It has also been established that the defendant Nos 1 and 2 have no connection with "indiatimes" and do not carry on any business under the name of "indiatimes" which is a mark belonging to the plaintiff. In these circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to the decree for injunction as well as for a decree on damages. However, no evidence has been led with regard to the extent of damages that has been incurred by the plaintiff. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that as decided by this court in various earlier decisions, punitive damages have been awarded in such cases. He referred to the following decisions: