The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Jockey International Inc. in a trademark infringement and passing-off action against sellers allegedly using marks such as JOYKE, JOYSKY, JOYBEE, JOYESS and JOJOKE for innerwear products on Meesho. The Court recorded that Jockey claimed long-standing adoption of the JOCKEY mark since 1934, multiple trademark registrations in India and abroad, and substantial goodwill and market presence, including through its exclusive Indian licensee.

Also Read Supreme Court Allows Mother to Act on Minor’s Property Share; Backs Welfare-Based Approval of Development Deal

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh observed that where the plaintiff in a trademark infringement and passing off action demonstrates prior adoption, statutory registrations, commercial reputation, and prima facie deceptive similarity between the rival marks used for identical goods through common trade channels, the Court may grant ex parte ad interim injunction if confusion is likely, the balance of convenience favours the plaintiff, and irreparable injury would otherwise result.

The Bench found that the Plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction, as the impugned marks were prima facie deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s registered JOCKEY trademark and were being used for identical products. The It further observed that the consumer base and trade channels were common, and therefore the likelihood of confusion could not be ruled out.

Also Read Madras High Court Affirms Conviction In POCSO Based On Dying Declaration; Upholds Life Imprisonment For Sexually Assaulting Minor and Droving Her to Self-Immolation

Briefly, the Plaintiff, Jockey International Inc., filed a commercial suit seeking urgent interim relief against the Defendants for alleged infringement and passing off of its well-known JOCKEY trademarks. The Plaintiff is a Wisconsin, USA company engaged in manufacturing, retailing and distributing undergarments, hosiery and comfort apparel, and that it carries on business in India through its exclusive licensee, Page Industries Limited, since 1994. The Plaintiff adopted the trademark JOCKEY in 1934, holds several registrations in India and abroad, and claims substantial goodwill, reputation, promotional expenditure and online presence in relation to the mark.

The grievance arose when, around January 2026, the Plaintiff discovered that Defendant No. 1 was selling products on Defendant No. 5’s platform, “www.meesho.com”, under the mark JOYKE, and further investigation revealed additional listings by Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 using marks such as JOYKE, JOYSKY, JOYBEE, JOYESS and JOJOKE in relation to identical goods. The Plaintiff also stated that despite issuance of a legal notice, there was no response, and Defendant No. 5 did not take down the listings without a court direction.

Appearances:

Saif Khan, Shobhit Agrawal and Diya Viswanath, Advocates, for Plaintiffs

NA, for Defendants

Order Copy- Jockey International Inc vs D.R. Kuppraj Tex India