Tuesday, July 22, 2025

Play Games 24X7 Private Limited Vs. WWW10XBETTCOM

Play Games 24X7 Private Limited Vs. WWW10XBETTCOM & Ors.:10.07.2025: CS(COMM) 657/2024:High Court of Delhi:Hon’ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee

The plaintiff, Play Games 24X7 Private Limited, is the registered proprietor of the trademark “MY11CIRCLE”, a well-known online fantasy sports gaming platform. The plaintiff had earlier secured an ex parte ad interim injunction on 07.08.2024 against 14 rogue websites engaged in infringing its trademark. The present order pertains to the plaintiff’s fresh application for impleadment of newly discovered infringing entities and for extending the earlier injunction to them.

After the earlier injunction, the plaintiff discovered that several new websites were unlawfully using its trademark “MY11CIRCLE” to lure users via dummy webpages, redirecting them to illegal betting platforms. The plaintiff therefore filed an application to implead new defendants, including additional rogue websites, domain name registrars (DNRs), and intermediaries, and sought extension of injunctive relief.

The court allowed the impleadment of Defendant Nos. 28 to 35, noting that some were running deceptive websites, others were using the plaintiff’s trademark in domain names, and the rest were domain name registrars of such infringing entities. It was found that the defendants had replicated the plaintiff’s mark and online identity to mislead users into believing in an association with the plaintiff’s brand, thereby promoting illegal betting services.

Given the seriousness of the plaintiff’s grievance and the public interest concerns involved, the court extended the original injunction order dated 07.08.2024 to cover the newly impleaded defendants. It restrained Defendant Nos. 28 to 32 from using the mark “MY11CIRCLE” or any deceptively similar trademark or domain name. 

Additionally, Defendant Nos. 33 to 35, being DNRs, were directed to block and suspend the infringing domains and to disclose subscriber and account registration details in a sealed cover. Internet intermediaries were also directed to immediately block access to the infringing websites, including any other John Doe entities misusing the plaintiff’s mark.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi

Disclaimer: This information report is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Featured Post

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PROVE THE TRADEMARK  REGISTRA...

My Blog List

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Search This Blog