In this commercial suit filed by Accor (a global hospitality giant owning the well-known trademark NOVOTEL since 1967, with extensive worldwide and Indian presence including 28 hotels in India and multiple valid registrations since 1990), the plaintiff sought injunction against Novotel Holidays Inn Private Limited for adopting and using the identical/near-identical mark 'NOVOTEL' as part of its corporate/trade name, domain, logo, and website for similar hospitality and travel-related services, thereby infringing the plaintiff's trademark, committing passing off, and attempting to ride on the plaintiff's long-established goodwill and reputation. The plaintiff had earlier sent cease and desist notices in 2022, pursued pre-litigation mediation (which the defendant did not attend), and successfully obtained transfer of the defendant's domain novotelholidaysinn.com through WIPO in 2023, yet the defendant continued the impugned use even after changing logos multiple times. In the interim application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC, the Delhi High Court, after noting the defendant's counsel appeared via VC but made no submissions, found the plaintiff prima facie established prior adoption, registration, global/Indian goodwill, and identical/near-identical use in the same field likely to cause confusion and false association; balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff and irreparable injury was shown due to dilution of reputation in the hospitality sector. The Court accordingly granted ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the defendant from using 'NOVOTEL' or any deceptively similar mark (including variants with smile device, golden scheme, or bird logo) as trade/corporate name, on website nhi.ind.in, or in any manner in relation to hospitality/travel services, till the next date of hearing.
Crisp bullet points of law settled in the case
Prior global and Indian adoption, long continuous use, extensive goodwill/reputation, and valid statutory registrations of a trademark (especially in hospitality services) confer strong prima facie rights entitling the proprietor to interim protection against identical/near-identical adoption by another in the same field (Paras 15–17)
Adoption and use of an identical/near-identical mark as part of corporate/trade name, domain, logo, and website for identical/similar services (hospitality and travel) constitutes prima facie trademark infringement under the Trade Marks Act and passing off, particularly when it creates likelihood of confusion, false association, or affiliation with the prior user (Paras 16–17, 13.15–13.17)
Dishonest intention is inferred from defendant's knowledge of plaintiff's mark (evident from field of activity and prior correspondence/WIPO proceedings), repeated changes in logo only after notices, and continued use despite domain transfer and settlement attempts (Paras 13.7–13.14, 16)
In cases of identical/near-identical marks in the same services, the test of confusion is satisfied even without actual confusion evidence, as continued unauthorized use causes irreparable injury to goodwill/reputation that cannot be compensated by damages (Paras 17, 13.19–13.20)
Balance of convenience tilts heavily in favour of the prior user with decades of reputation when the defendant is a recent adopter (2022) and has not invested in building independent goodwill (Paras 17, 13.11–13.13)
Case Details
Case Title : Accor Vs. Novotel Holidays Inn Private Limited
Order Date : 22nd December 2025
Case Number : CS(COMM) 1383/2025
Neutral Citation : 2025:DHC:XXXXX (exact neutral citation to be assigned)
Court : High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Judge : Tejas Karia, J.
[Readers are advised not to treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation]
[Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi]
