$~18

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CS (COMM) 607/2022 & I.As. 14189-92/2022
HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA)
& ANR. ..... Plaintiffs
Through: Mr. Shivendra Pratap Singh, Mr.
Sunil Mishra and Mr. Navdeep
Suhag, Advocates. (M:8826906894)
versus

AMAZON INDIA LIMITED & ANR. ..... Defendants

Through: Mr. Sidharth Chopra, Ms. Sneha Jain
and Mr. Vivek Ayyagari, Advocates.
(M:9560400687)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 05.09.2022
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
I.A.14190/2022 (for exemption)
2. This is an application seeking exemption from filing
certified/cleared/typed or translated copies of documents. Exemption is
allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. I.A.14190/2022 is disposed of.
I.A.14191/2022 (additional documents)
4. This is an application seeking leave to file additional documents under
the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate
Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter, ‘Commercial Courts Act’).
The Plaintiffs, if they wish to file additional documents at a later stage, shall
do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act.

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 1 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 5. I.A.14191/2022 is disposed of.
I.A.14192/2022 (u/S 12A)
6. This is an application seeking exemption instituting pre-litigation
mediation. In view of the orders passed in CS (COMM) 132/2022 titled
Upgrad Education v. Intellipaat Software and the recent order of this Court
dated 29th August, 2022 passed in CS(COMM) 582/2022 titled Bolt
Technology OU v. Ujoy Technology Private Limited & Anr., the exemption
is granted.
7. I.A.14192/2022 is allowed and disposed of.
CS (COMM) 607/2022
8. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
9. Issue summons to the Defendants. Mr. Siddharth Chopra, ld. Counsel
accepts summons on behalf of Amazon.
10. Let the written statement(s) to the Plaint be positively filed within 30
days from the date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statement,
the Defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the
documents of the Plaintiffs, without which the written statement shall not be
taken on record.
11. Liberty is given to the Plaintiffs to file a replication within 30 days of
the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication, if any,
filed by the Plaintiffs, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the
Defendants, be filed by the Plaintiffs, without which the replication shall not
be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any
documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
12. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 10th October,
2022. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 2 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 be liable to be burdened with costs.
13. List before Court on 31st October, 2022.
I.A.14189/2022 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC)
14. The present suit has been filed by Hamdard National Foundation
(India)- Plaintiff No.1 and Hamdard Dawakhana also trading as Hamdard
Laboratories India- Plaintiff No.2 against two companies namely Amazon
India Limited- Defendant No.1 and M/s. Golden Leaf, C/o Amazon Seller
Services Pvt. Limited- Defendant No.2. The suit relates to the product and
mark of the Plaintiffs ‘ROOH AFZA’. The case of the Plaintiffs is that
Plaintiff Nos.1 & 2 are engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling
various Unani and Ayurvedic medicines, oils, syrups and non-alcoholic
beverages. The Hamdard Group of the Plaintiffs has a history which dates
back to over 100 years when well-known Unani practitioner ‘Hakeem Hafiz
Abdul Majeed’ set up a Unani clinic under the name ‘Hamdard
Dawakhana’. Over the years, the activities of the Plaintiffs have expanded
and they have been involved in research and development.
15. The Plaintiffs own rights in the marks ‘HAMDARD’ and ‘ROOH
AFZA’ details of which are mentioned in paragraph no. 11 of the plaint. The
mark ‘ROOH AFZA’ was adopted by the Plaintiffs in 1907 and the said
product is a market leader in its segment. The mark ‘ROOH AFZA’ has
been used by the Plaintiffs for a range of products including non-alcoholic
sharbets and beverages, for which Plaintiff No.2 has obtained the
assignment on 11th August, 1975 from Plaintiff No.1. The mark ROOH
AFZA is registered in India and one of the registrations of the Plaintiffs
dates back to 3rd August, 1942. Other trademarks have also been registered
by the Plaintiffs for variants of ‘ROOH AFZA’, including the labels and

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 3 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 flavour variants etc., The annual sales of the products under the mark
‘ROOH AFZA’ brand are over Rs.200 crores and a substantial amount has
also been incurred by the Plaintiffs in the advertisement and promotion of
the brand.
16. The grievance of the Plaintiffs in the present case is that Defendant
No.1- Amazon India Limited, runs the e-commerce website
www.amazon.in. Defendant No.2- M/s. Golden Leaf, which claims to have
the contact details- C/o Amazon Sellers Service Pvt. Ltd., 26/1, 10th Floor,
Brigade World Trade Center, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Bengaluru- 560055
(Karnataka), is a seller on the www.amazon.in platform selling and offering
for sale the product ‘ROOH AFZA’.
17. Mr. Shivendra Pratap Singh, ld. Counsel for the Plaintiffs submits that
the Plaintiffs noticed various ‘ROOH AFZA’ products at www.amazon.in
platform and addressed notices to the sellers as also to Amazon India. The
said sellers were ‘M/s Royal Sales’ and ‘M/s. Good Health Enterprises’.
Upon these notices having been issued on 4th September, 2021 and 9th
December, 2021, the said listings were removed from www.amazon.in
platform. However, recently another listing by one ‘M/s. Golden Leaf’ was
found by the Plaintiffs on the website of Defendant No.1 and upon clicking
on ‘Golden Leaf’, the contact details were shown as ‘C/o Amazon Sellers
Services Pvt. Ltd’. The Plaintiffs effected purchases of the said product on
6th December, 2021 and found to their utter shock and surprise that the said
product was not manufactured by the Plaintiffs. Ld. counsel for the Plaintiffs
submits that the said product is manufactured in Pakistan and also does not
comply with the legal requirements of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009
(hereinafter referred as “LMA”), the Legal Metrology (Packaged

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 4 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 Commodities) Rules, 2011, and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
(hereinafter referred as ‘FSSAI’) which governs such products.
18. Mr. Siddharth Chopra, ld. Counsel appears for Amazon Sellers
Service Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter ‘Amazon Sellers’) upon seeing the matter in
the cause list and submits that Defendant No.1- Amazon India Limited is not
connected with the company, Amazon Sellers Service Pvt. Ltd., which runs
the e-commerce platform www.amazon.in, in any manner. He, however,
submits that if the URLs of the infringing listings are furnished to him, the
same shall be taken down. He also submits that Amazon Sellers has not
received the copy of the paper book.
19. Let a copy of the paper book be supplied to Mr. Chopra, ld. Counsel
for Amazon Sellers today itself. Ld. counsel for the Plaintiffs submits that
purchases were affected by the Plaintiffs thrice from three sellers through
www.amazon.in platform and on all three occasions, the product which was
supplied was claimed to be manufactured by ‘Hamdard Laboratories
(Waqf), Pakistan’ from Karachi, Pakistan. Let copies of all the invoices
showing purchases be supplied by ld. Counsel for the Plaintiffs to Mr.
Chopra, ld. Counsel.
20. Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiffs has produced the ‘Hamdard ROOH
AFZA’ product bottle which is stated to be purchased by them through
www.amazon.in platform. A perusal of the physical products shows that the
same is shown to be manufactured by ‘Hamdard Laboratory (Waqf),
Karachi, Pakistan’. There are no other details of the manufacturer
mentioned on the product apart from just the name of the manufacturer. No
address, email address or telephone number of the manufacturer is available
at the label of the product. The label on the bottle produced by the Plaintiffs

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 5 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 is as under:

21. The manufacturing date on the product is shown as March, 2020 and
the expiry date is March, 2022. The Plaintiffs’ case is that this product also
does not comply with the LMA and FSSAI regulations. It is also not clear as
to how these products are being imported from Pakistan when clearly the
Plaintiffs have statutory rights in the marks in India.
22. The Court has, during the course of hearing, also accessed the website
www.amazon.in which reveals that there are various ‘ROOH AFZA’
products being offered for sale. However, on a cursory browsing the names
of the sellers, their addresses/contact details are not clear.
23. Clearly, ‘ROOH AFZA’ is a product which has been consumed by the
Indian public for over a century now. The same being a drink for human
consumption, the quality standards have to comply with the applicable
regulations prescribed by the FSSAI and LMA. It is surprising that an
imported product is being sold on www.amazon.in platform without the
complete details of the manufacturer being disclosed. Moreover, when one
clicks on the link ‘Visit the Hamdard Store’, which is provided next to the
product listing of Defendant No.2, the consumer is taken to the webpage of

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 6 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 ‘Hamdard Laboratories India’ on www.amazon.com, which is of the
Plaintiffs. Thus, any consumer or user on the www.amazon.in platform is
likely to confuse the ‘ROOH AFZA’ product originating from Hamdard
Laboratories (Waqf), Pakistan as being connected or originating from the
Plaintiffs. Until and unless the consumer actually receives the product, the
consumer has no way of knowing as to whether the product being sold is
that of the Plaintiffs or not. This can have an adverse impact on the
consumers, inasmuch as the details of the sellers are not known. Since
www.amazon.in claims to be an intermediary it has an obligation to disclose
names of sellers, their contact details etc., on the product listings.
24. Under these circumstances, the Court is convinced that the Plaintiffs
have made out a prima facie case for grant of an ad-interim injunction. The
balance of convenience lies in the favour of the Plaintiffs and if an
injunction is not granted at this stage, irreparable injury would be caused to
the Plaintiffs. Mr. Siddharth Chopra, ld. counsel, wishes to seek instructions.
However, considering the nature of the dispute, urgent interim injunction
orders are required to be passed not only in order to recognize the Plaintiffs’
rights but also to ensure that the products not meant for consumption in
India are not sold on the www.amazon.in platform. Accordingly, the
following directions are issued:
(1) The listings of infringing ‘ROOH AFZA’ products on the
website www.amazon.in not originating from the Plaintiffs
shall be removed within 48 hours. If the Plaintiffs have details
of the said URLs, the same shall be submitted to Mr. Chopra ld.
Counsel for Amazon Sellers Service Pvt. Ltd.

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 7 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 (2) The said company shall also check up as to who are the sellers
who are selling ‘ROOH AFZA’ products on its platform and if
any of the said products are found not to be originating from the
Plaintiffs, their listings shall be removed immediately.
(3) If any of the product listings show the products are
manufactured or originating from the Plaintiffs, in such a
situation, www.amazon.in shall give notice to the said seller to
confirm that the same originate from the Plaintiffs and if so,
such listings shall be retained.
(4) Since Amazon Sellers claims to be an intermediary under the
Information Technology Act, 2000, it shall file an affidavit
clarifying as to whether the details of the sellers, including the
place of manufacturing of the products, the complete address of
the sellers, and the contact details, including the telephone
number, email address etc. are mentioned on the ROOH AFZA
product listings, invoices, product labels etc. If the same are not
available on the product listings, Amazon Sellers shall clarify
as to in what manner consumers expected to obtain such details
from www.amazon.in platform. The said affidavit shall be filed
within four weeks.
(5) The ld. Counsel for Amazon Sellers shall provide the details of
the sellers of all the ‘ROOH AFZA’ product listings on its
website to the Plaintiffs, within one week, who may then take
steps in accordance with law for impleadment etc., if so
advised.

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 8 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04
 (6) The Plaintiffs are permitted to inform Amazon Sellers of any
listings which they may come across even in the future, in
respect of ‘ROOH AFZA’ branded products which are not
manufactured and sold by the Plaintiffs so that the same can be
immediately removed from the website within 48 hours of the
intimation.
25. Let reply to the application be filed within 4 weeks. Amended memo
of parties be filed changing the name of Amazon India Limited to Amazon
Sellers Service Pvt. Ltd.
26. List before the Court on 31st October, 2022.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
SEPTEMBER 5, 2022/dk/sk

CS (COMM) 607/2022 Page 9 of 9

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:07.09.2022
16:35:04