preloader image

Loading...

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

Interim order passed restraining Meta from circulating Defemantory video on Patanjali registered Trademark: Bombay High Court

Interim order passed restraining Meta from circulating Defemantory video on Patanjali registered Trademark: Bombay High Court

Factual Background 

In the matter of Patanjali Foods Limited v. Meta Platforms Inc & Ors. A video with negative comments about the plaintiff’s edible oil bearing the registered brand “MAHAKOSH” is making circulated on Facebook pages. The Plaintiff asserts that it is a well-known producer and marketer of a variety of edible oils, as well as an early adopter of soy meals in India. The defamatory video has been spread online against a specific product of the plaintiff called Mahakosh Refined Soyabean Oil, according to the plaintiff. The video not only violates the plaintiff’s registered trademark but also has the unintended consequence of distributing inaccurate and misleading information about the plaintiff’s goods that carries the registered trademark. In response to a Facebook video that contained insults directed at their product, Patanjali filed a complaint with the court, asking for immediate relief on the grounds that the videos will continue to damage their brand. The aforementioned videos would keep harming the plaintiff’s registered trademark’s good name. Invoking clauses (a) and (c) of Section 29(8) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 on behalf of the Plaintiff in the current proceedings,

Analysis of Judgement 

A John Doe order was issued by Bombay High Court Single-Judge Justice Manish Pitale requiring Meta and everyone else to remove disparaging videos that allegedly violated Patanjali Food’s registered trademark. In addition, the court issued a temporary injunction prohibiting Meta platforms from sharing videos that Patanjali had objected to in its lawsuit charging trademark infringement of the name “Mahakosh,” a brand of edible oil produced by the company. The Court was convinced after reviewing the evidence that Section 29 (infringement of registered trademark) was violated prima facie.

The bench notes that the video in question, which is accessible on Meta platforms, appears as prima facie evidence to have violated Patanjali’s registered brand. Ad-interim reliefs in favor of Patanjali are passed by the court to impose restrictions on the meta for circulating defamatory videos on various social media sides.