Parties Involved
The plaintiff, H-D U.S.A., LLC (Harley-Davidson USA), is a globally recognized manufacturer of motorcycles and branded merchandise. The defendant, Vijaypal Dhayal, is the owner and proprietor of Red Rose Industries, operating from Gurugram, Haryana.
Nature of the Dispute
The plaintiff filed a commercial intellectual property suit alleging infringement of its trademarks and copyrights. It claimed that the defendant was selling footwear bearing a logo deceptively similar to Harley-Davidson’s iconic “Eagle” and “Bar & Shield” marks, which diluted its brand and misled consumers.
Trademark Background
Harley-Davidson began using the ‘HARLEY-DAVIDSON’ trademark in 1903 and introduced the ‘Bar & Shield’ logo in 1910. Over time, it secured more than 2,200 trademark registrations worldwide, including numerous registrations in India. The brand enjoys a significant presence with sales in over 90 countries and a vast dealership network.
Discovery of Infringement
In July 2023, the plaintiff discovered through its representatives that the defendant was marketing footwear using a nearly identical logo under the brand “RONTEX.” The infringing goods were available both physically and on e-commerce platforms like Amazon, Flipkart, and IndiaMART.
Legal Proceedings
The court, on 1st September 2023, issued summons and appointed a local commissioner who, during an inspection, found 640 pairs of infringing shoes at the defendant’s premises. On 25th September 2023, the court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing or selling any product using the infringing mark.
Despite receiving several opportunities, the defendant failed to submit a written statement or reply to the court. Consequently, the right to file a written statement was closed, and the plaintiff moved for summary judgment.
Court’s Findings
The court found that the defendant had copied Harley-Davidson’s eagle logo almost entirely. The design elements—eagle figure, ribbon, and shield layout—were replicated with only the textual element changed to “Sports Casual.” The court held that the similarities were likely to mislead consumers into believing that the goods were associated with the plaintiff.
Further, it noted that the defendant appeared to be a habitual infringer, engaging in similar practices with other well-known brands. With no valid defense or denial on record, the court determined that trademark infringement and passing off were clearly established.
Judgment and Relief
The court held that there was no realistic prospect of the defendant successfully defending the suit. Exercising powers under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, it delivered a summary judgment. The plaintiff was granted a permanent injunction. The defendant was directed to destroy all infringing goods in the presence of an authorized representative of the plaintiff. The court also awarded damages and legal costs amounting to five lakh rupees in favor of the plaintiff.
Case Details
Case Title: H-D U.S.A., LLC Vs Vijaypal Dhayal
Date of Order: 2nd April, 2025
Case No.: CS(COMM) 609/2023 & I.A. 42209/2024
Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:2489
Name of Court: High Court of Delhi
Name of Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal
