Lotus Herbals Private Limited Vs Dimple Pradipkumar Tanna Trading as Quttix Skin Science & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Lotus Herbals Private Limited Vs Dimple Pradipkumar Tanna Trading as Quttix Skin Science & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permanent injunction decree against defendants no.1 to 3 in terms of prayer clauses 56 (A) and (B) of the plaint; defendants no.1 to 3 to furnish information/links to defendant no.5 for take-down of listings; certificate of refund of 100% of the Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff; decree sheet to be drawn up.

Ratio / Principle

A decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants no.1 to 3 in terms of prayer clauses 56 (A) and (B) of the plaint.

Key takeaways

Defendants no.1 to 3 are directed to provide the necessary information/links to defendant no.5 so that defendant no.5 can take down the listings of the product bearing the impugned mark from its portal.ratio¶22
As the matter was settled at an initial stage, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate of refund of 100% of the Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff, in terms of Section 16 of the Court-Fees Act, 1870 read with Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CS(COMM) 464/2025 & I.A. 12114/2025 (Lotus Herbals Private Limited v. Dimple Pradipkumar Tanna trading as Quttix Skin Science & Ors.), High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, Amit Bansal, J., order dated 14.07.2025. Pursuant to the Court's order of 7th July 2025, counsel for defendants no.1 to 3 stated that they shall not use the word 'LOTUS' as part of their trademark and shall destroy all existing stock of goods bearing the mark 'LOTUS'; counsel for the plaintiff expressed satisfaction with these statements. Accordingly, a decree of permanent injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiff and against defendants no.1 to 3 in terms of prayer clauses 56 (A) and (B) of the plaint. Counsel for defendant no.5/IndiaMart submitted that it shall take down all listings of the product bearing the impugned mark from its portal, and defendants no.1 to 3 were directed to provide the necessary information/links to defendant no.5 for that purpose. Plaintiff did not press the remaining reliefs prayed for in the plaint; decree sheet to be drawn up. As the matter was settled at an initial stage, the Registry was directed to issue a certificate of refund of 100% of the Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff in terms of Section 16 of the Court-Fees Act, 1870 read with Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

$~33

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CS(COMM) 464/2025 & I.A. 12114/2025

LOTUS HERBALS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff

Through: Mr. Vaibhav Vutts, Ms. Aamna Hasan, Ms. Aarya Deshmukh and Ms. Vaibavi SG, Advocates

versus

DIMPLE PRADIPKUMAR TANNA TRADING AS QUTTIX SKIN SCIENCE & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav and Ms. Sandhya Chaturvedi, Advocates for D-1 to D-3 Ms. Priya Goyal, Advocate for D-5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R % 14.07.2025

Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 7^th July, 2025, counsel for the defendants no.1 to 3 has returned with instructions which are as follows:-

i. The defendants no.1 to 3 shall not use the word ‘LOTUS’ as a

part of their trademark.

ii. The defendants no.1 to 3 shall destroy all existing stock of

goods bearing the mark ‘LOTUS’.

Counsel for the plaintiff is satisfied with the aforesaid statement.

Accordingly, a decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of

Page 1 of 2

CS(COMM) 464/2025

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 17/07/2025 at 12:02:19

the plaintiff and against the defendants no.1 to 3 in terms of prayer clauses 56 (A) and (B) of the plaint.

In view of the aforesaid settlement, counsel appearing for the defendant no.5/IndiaMart submits that they shall take down all listings of the product bearing the impugned mark from their portal.

The defendants no.1 to 3 shall provide the necessary information/links to the defendant no.5 in order for the defendant no.5 to take down the said listings.

Counsel for the plaintiff does not press for the remaining reliefs prayed for in the plaint.

Decree sheet be drawn up.

In view of the fact that the matter has been settled at an initial stage, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate of refund of 100% of the Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff, in terms of Section 16 of the Court-Fees Act, 1870 read with Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

AMIT BANSAL, J

JULY 14, 2025 ds

Page 2 of 2

CS(COMM) 464/2025

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 17/07/2025 at 12:02:19