RAJESH DALAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable with the consent of the parties and heard finally.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of the present application are as under:-

(3.) The complainant M/s. Ezeego one Travels & Tours Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The complainant company is a dotcom company which owns and manages a website namely, www.ezeego1.com. This website offers internet users a virtual travel marketplace. It fashions itself to be an online travel bazar that offers all travel related services including air ticket, hotel bookings, tours, transport, insurance, etc. Ezeeg1 is a trade mark vested with the complainant company. The certificate of registration was issued to the company on 06/03/2008. Respondent No.2 alleged to have adopted the mark "EZEEGO1" as a Trade Mark and ezeego1.com as a domain name amongst other variants thereof. In August 2008, Respondent No.2 claims to have come across various domain names that were similar to the domain name ezeego1.com, which it learnt were registered in the name of Accused No.2. The Accused No.3 was indicated as the organization of those domain names. On 28th August 2008, the Chief Operating Officer of the Respondent No.2, Ms. Neeru Singh, brought the alleged registration of the domain name ezeego11.com to the notice of the Accused No.1. As is evident from the chain of emails attached to the Complaint, on 29th August 2008, the Accused No.1 replied to the aforesaid email indicating that, he was not aware of the registration of the said domain name, and also assured to Respondent No.2 that the alleged registration will be blocked, and, on the same day, the said domain name was blocked, which was also intimated by Accused No.1 to Respondent No.2. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 brought to the notice of one of the employees of the Accused No.3 a few other domain names which are alleged to be similar to its domain name ezeego1.com. These domain names were then transferred to Respondent No.2 on or before 15th October 2008 after enquiring about a few details from the Respondent No.2, which were necessary to affect the transfer of the domain names. The Applicants were admittedly not notified of any such registration.