Leading Law Firms & Top Lawyers in Chennai Madras High Court: Property Solicitors, Best Corporate Lawyers, Top Rated IPR Attorneys, DRT Lawyers, NCLT Advocates, Labour Legal consultants, Civil Litigation Lawyers, Criminal Advocates, Family Court Lawyers, NRI and Tax Legal Advisers
PhonePE vs DigiPE - PhonePe Private Limited v. DigiPe Fintech Private Limited

PhonePe Private Limited v. DigiPe Fintech Private Limited Citation O.A.Nos.809 to 812 of 2022 C.S(Comm. Div). No.248 of 2022

Madras High Court Restrains ‘DigiPE’ on Temporary basis From Using Its TradeMark, Says it as Trademark Infringement which is Deceptively Similar To ‘PhonePe’.

The Madras High Court has temporarily restricted DigiPe Fintech Private Limited from using its trademark “DIGIPE” in response to an action for Trademark infringement brought by the well-known digital payments company PhonePe. Justice C Saravanan said the violation of the trademark ‘DigiPE‘ shares a lot of similarities with the PhonePe mark, which is in class 35 36, 42, and 37 by PhonePe Private Limited. “Considering the fact that the respondents have not yet entered into the UPI business, the balance of convenience for grant of interim relief is in favor of the applicant/plaintiff,” said the court.

Official notice to DigiPe on PhonePe TM Matter

PhonePe has been part of the Uniform Payers Interface (UPI) operation since the year 2016 and was granted permission from the RBI to use it. The permission was renewed in August of 2022 for an additional time. The court found that in the event that PhonePe had sent an official notice to DigiPe that the company declared that they were willing to negotiate an agreement. However, instead of heeding the same the company went ahead and applied for the registration of the name “DIGIPE” in September 2022.

Official notice to DigiPe on PhonePe TM Matter: Trademark Infringement Attorneys
PhonePe Private Limited v. DigiPe Fintech Private Limited Citation O.A.Nos.809 to 812 of 2022 C.S(Comm. Div). No.248 of 2022

The court stated that the interim relief will be granted for a period of four weeks. It will then list the case after four weeks to file a counter and any further orders, it said. “The respondent/defendant won’t be liable for any loss or damage when the interim relief is granted in the manner requested. However, on contrary, if no injunction is granted the applicant might have to endure the usage of the Trademark in question “DIGIPE” which appears to be like the trademarks “Phone Pe” registered in Clauses 9, 35, 36, and 42 by applicant.”

Case Name: PhonePe Private Limited v. DigiPe Fintech Private Limited Citation O.A.Nos.809 to 812 of 2022 C.S(Comm. Div). No.248 of 2022

Popular Questions:

RSS
Follow by Email
YouTube
LinkedIn
LinkedIn
Share