In a major interim relief to Amazon Technologies Inc. (ATI), the Delhi High Court, on July 1, 2025, stayed a single-judge ruling that had directed the company to pay ā¹336.02 crore (approximately $39 million) in damages to Lifestyle Equities CV and Lifestyle Licensing BV. The order under challenge arose from a trademark infringement suit concerning the use of a mark allegedly deceptively similar to the āBeverly Hills Polo Clubā (BHPC) logo.
A Division Bench comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul granted the stay while hearing an appeal filed by ATI [RFA(OS)(COMM) 11/2025]. Notably, the Bench dispensed with the usual requirement of a pre-deposit, citing significant procedural lapses and violations of natural justice in the trial proceedings. Instead, Amazon was directed to provide an undertaking to honour the damages award if the appeal fails.
The impugned judgment, delivered on February 25, 2025, was passed in ATIās absence, after it was proceeded ex parte in April 2022. The Court found that the trial, evidence, and final decree were conducted solely with the plaintiff present, resulting in a one-sided proceeding. The original claim in the suit was ā¹2 crore, but damages were later raised to over ā¹3780 crore during final written submissions without amending the pleadingsāultimately resulting in an award of ā¹336 crore against Amazon.
The Division Bench noted that no separate or concrete allegation of infringement was made specifically against ATI in the original pleadings. The plaintiff’s claims primarily targeted Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd., which had already accepted liability and was ordered to pay ā¹4.78 lakh. The Bench emphasized that the enhancement of damages without an amended plaint and without giving Amazon an opportunity to contest the new claims amounted to a clear breach of natural justice.
The Court also found that there was no evidence directly linking ATI with the infringing products or with the use of the contested logo. It highlighted that ATIās role was limited to licensing the ‘Symbol’ mark to Cloudtail and that the plaintiffs had themselves admitted uncertainty over the relationship between the Amazon entities.
Concluding that the damages award was unsupported by pleadings or evidence, and that the proceedings were conducted unfairly, the High Court granted an unconditional stay on the judgment and decree. The matter is now posted for further hearing on October 9, 2025.
ReadĀ ATI v Lifestyle Judgment