The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of GoodAI Global Inc., the owner of the Korean skincare brand “Beauty of Joseon”, restraining three defendants from manufacturing, selling, advertising, importing or dealing in products bearing the plaintiff’s registered device mark or the brand name “Beauty of Joseon”, or any deceptively similar mark or trade dress. The Court also directed Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. to immediately delist the infringing product listings identified by the plaintiff.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed the order while hearing a commercial suit alleging trademark infringement, passing off, misleading advertisements, disparagement, unjust enrichment and damages. The Court registered the suit and issued summons to the defendants, while exempting the plaintiff from pre-institution mediation in view of the urgency involved.
Also Read Dealership Termination Is a Commercial Dispute; CCI Closes Antitrust Case Against Nissan
The plaintiff argued that the dispute concerns the same defendants against whom a Coordinate Bench of the High Court had, on January 28, 2025, directed the Trade Marks Registry to remove their trademark registration relating to the impugned mark. Despite the cancellation of that registration, the defendants allegedly continued to market products using the same branding and trade dress, thereby misleading consumers into believing that the products originated from or were associated with the plaintiff.
During the hearing, the plaintiff produced samples of its genuine products alongside those sold by the defendants, contending that the defendants had copied not only the trademark but also the overall trade dress of the products. The Court observed that, even if the present case may not strictly involve infringement of a registered trademark after the cancellation of the defendants’ registration, the plaintiff had nevertheless made out a case of passing off based on the deceptive similarity in the branding and packaging.
Finding that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case, and that the balance of convenience lay in its favour, the Court held that irreparable injury would be caused if interim protection was denied. Accordingly, it restrained defendants 1 to 3 from using the plaintiff’s trademark and trade dress or any deceptively similar mark until the next date of hearing.
The Court also noted that Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. (defendant no. 4) had appeared before it and expressed willingness to comply with any directions issued by the Court. It consequently directed Amazon to delist the infringing product listings identified in the plaint and permitted the plaintiff to communicate any additional URLs requiring removal to ensure effective compliance with the injunction.
The matter has been listed before the Joint Registrar on September 25, 2026, for completion of pleadings and further proceedings.
