[Trademark Dispute] Delhi High Court passes order in favor of One Moto Scooters

The Delhi High Court has recently passed order in favor of One Moto Scooters Trading LLC to prevent the former licensees from launching or using its Trademark.

A single bench of Justice Pratibha Singh restrained Center Systems Group Internet Content Provider (CSG ICP) from launching or using the ‘One Moto’ mark.

“Accordingly, because the question of maintainability would require some hearing and that there is an imminent threat of the respondents launching or using the mark ‘ONE MOTO’ in some manner, including by appointment of distributors or commencing manufacturing of automotive products, it is deemed appropriate to restrain the respondents," observed Court.

The case of the One Moto Scooters was that an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 had been filed on account of various disputes that arose with the respondents out of the distributorship agreement that permitted CSG ICP to make use of the Trade Mark and Copyrights about “One Moto”, “Electa”, “Commuta”, “Ryda”, “Scoota”, “Deliva” and “Byka” in respect of electric vehicles.

The petitioner objected that the respondent was encroaching upon their trademark and copyrights by assuming ownership over the same and were in the process of launching the electric vehicles under the aforesaid licensed trademarks and copyrights.

The petitioner also alleged that one Mohd Abdul Majid- one of the Directors of Respondent no. 2 company- in his individual capacity, applied for mark 'ONE MOTO' on a 'proposed -to-be-used' basis. The petitioner alleged that this was complete breach of the obligations of CSG ICP as Majid was father of the signatory of the agreement on behalf of CSG ICP.

The aforementioned agreement comprised of an arbitration clause subjecting the parties to the agreement to the London Court of International Arbitration in case of any dispute and the seat of the arbitration was to be London with the governing law of England and Wales. Since the cause of action arose partly in Delhi and the fact that the respondent was using the website www.one-moto.in, the matter was dealt with by the Delhi High Court.

Court opined, “...there is an imminent threat of the Respondents launching or using the mark ‘ONE MOTO’ in some manner, including by appointment of distributors or commencing manufacturing of automotive products, it is deemed appropriate to restrain the Respondents from changing the status quo as it exists today.”

Accordingly, Court restrained the respondent from using the mark ‘ONE MOTO’, the device mark, or any other mark which is identical or deceptively similar to the trademarks of the products ‘ONE MOTO’, ‘ELECT’, ‘COMMUTA’, ‘RYDA’, ‘SCOOTA’, ‘DELIVA’ and ‘BYKA’ which were the subject matter of the distributorship agreement, executed between the parties in May 2021, till the next date of hearing.

“So far as the website ‘www.one-moto.in’ is concerned, the same has currently been taken down. It is directed that the status quo shall be maintained and the domain name shall remain blocked. Copy of this order shall be communicated to the National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI) by the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner” ordered the Court.

Since the Distributorship Agreement stands terminated, the Respondents cannot also proceed with any contractual arrangements with the sub-distributors in respect of these marks. Any other independent relationship is, however, not restrained.

Furthermore, Court ordered, “To enable the parties to negotiate an arrangement in respect of sub-distribution arrangements or the sponsorship of the IPL team which is stated to have been made by ‘ONE MOTO’, Sudhanshu Batra, Senior Advocate is appointed as the Mediator to attempt an amicable resolution of the disputes between the parties”.

“The same shall be without prejudice to all the claims and counter-claims which the parties may have against each other,” added the Court.

The matter has been listed before Court on September 23, 2022 for further hearing.

Case Title: One Moto Scooters Trading LLC v. Centre Systems Group Internet Content Provider