Delhi High Court
CS(COMM)/1287/2025 of ONESTO LABS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs ASHOK KUMAR & ORS. on 28 September 2026
Page 1 of 4 $~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010971412025 + CS(COMM) 1287/2025, I.A. 30259/2025 & I.A. 22384/2026 ONESTO LABS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through: Ms. Kripa Pandit and Mr. Christopher Thomas, Advs. versus ASHOK KUMAR & ORS. .....Defendants
$~45
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010971412025
+
CS(COMM) 1287/2025, I.A. 30259/2025 & I.A. 22384/2026
ONESTO LABS PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Plaintiff
Through:
Ms. Kripa Pandit and Mr. Christopher
Thomas, Advs.
versus
ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.
.....Defendants
Through:
Mr. Mrinal Ojha, Mr. Debarshi Dutta,
Mr. Nikhil Gupta and Mr. Aditya
Dash, Advs. for D-4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
% 28.09.2026
1. The present suit has been instituted on behalf of the plaintiff, inter alia, seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of the plaintiff’s registered trade mark, logo, trade dress and domain name, as well as, passing off thereof.
2. The case put forth is that the plaintiff is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, having its registered office at Delhi.
3. The plaintiff is engaged in manufacturing, distributing and selling personal care products. The plaintiff, under its house mark “Innovist”, has a diverse portfolio of brands such as “Chemist at Play”, “Bare Anatomy”, “Vinci” and “SunScoop”.
4. It is further stated that the plaintiff’s products are available, amongst others, through its official website www.chemistatplay.in [plaintiff’s website]. The plaintiff’s website was registered on 12th June, 2021. The plaintiff’s trademark ‘CHEMIST AT PLAY’ has been registered vide Application No. 4957629 dated 27th April, 2021 and the same is valid till 27.04.2031.
5. The suit was filed on John Doe basis. By a detailed order dated, 04.12.2025, this Court had restrained the defendant no.1 and its associate, business partners, legal heirs and/or any person are restrained from operating/creating/using/bidding/selling/ transferring/renewing the Impugned Website, www.chemistatplay.com and other false and fabricate websites and/or any other form and/or part thereof and/or uploading/sharing/hosting on its websites either by itself or through third- party websites containing the Plaintiff’s Mark, ‘CHEMIST AT PLAY’/ ‘ ’ and its products that amount to infringement of the plaintiff’s mark. The operative part of the said order reads thus: “22. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, it is directed as under: a. Defendant No. 1 and its associate, business partners, legal heirs and / or any person are restrained from operating / creating / using / bidding / selling / transferring / renewing the Impugned Website, www.chemistatplay.com and other false ad fabricate websites and / or any other form and / or part thereof and / or uploading / sharing / hosting on its websites either by itself or through third-party websites containing the Plaintiff’s Mark, ‘CHEMIST AT PLAY’ / ‘ ’ and its products that amount to infringement of the Plaintiff’s Mark. b. Defendant Nos. 4 to 6 shall lock, suspend, take down, remove and disable the Impugned Website, www.chemistatplay.com within 7 days of the receipt of the Notice and this Order. Defendant Nos. 4 to 6 shall also file in a sealed cover / password protected document all the all the Basic Subscriber Information, including the names, email address, contact number, IP logs and registration details of the owners, operators of the Impugned Website within two weeks from the receipt of the Notice and this Order.”
6. The defendant no.1 is john doe. Defendant nos.2 and 3 are stated to be proforma parties. The defendant no.5 has already been deleted from the array of defendants. Defendant no.4 is the domain name Registrar. Defendant no.6 is stated to be an entity which facilitated the use of the website.
7. Ms. Kripa Pandit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff submits that no relief is being sought against defendant no.6.
8. Mr. Mrinal Ojha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant no.4 submits that he has instructions to state that the defendant no.4 is ready to transfer the domain name www.chemistatplay.com to the plaintiff if directed by this Court, subject to the plaintiff providing necessary account information and bearing necessary costs, if any, in respect of the same.
9. Since the defendant no.4 has agreed to transfer the domain name in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant no.4 is directed to do the needful, within a period of four weeks upon the plaintiff providing necessary information of its account, as well as, complying with the formalities as regards fee, etc.
10. In view of the above directions, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that she has no objection in case defendant no.4 is deleted from the array of defendants. Ordered accordingly.
11. Considering that there is no contest to the present suit, temporary injunction granted by this Court vide order dated 04.12.2025 is made absolute and the suit is decreed against defendant no.1 in terms of prayer (A) and (B) of the plaint. Plaintiff gives up the remaining reliefs sought in the suit.
12. Let the Registry draw the decree sheet accordingly.
13. The pending applications are also disposed of. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026 aj/sj