Delhi High Court Grants Ex Parte Ad Interim Injunction to JSW MG Motor India Against Fraudulent Dealership Websites, Orders Domain Suspension and Lien on Bank Funds

The Delhi High Court, in JSW MG Motor India Private Limited & Anr. v. Anant Kumar Singh & Ors., granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using the Plaintiffs’ “MG” trademarks, logos, website design and other branding elements to fraudulently offer dealership opportunities. The Court observed that the unauthorised use of identical marks was prima facie causing confusion and deception among members of the public, resulting in financial loss and damage to the Plaintiffs’ goodwill. In addition to directing the suspension of three impugned domain names, the Court ordered Indian Overseas Bank to mark a lien on the identified bank account to the extent of ₹14,55,700/- and directed intermediaries to disclose relevant user and account information.

Facts of the Case

JSW MG Motor India Private Limited and its parent company instituted a commercial suit alleging that certain individuals were impersonating the Plaintiffs and fraudulently offering dealership opportunities under the “MG” and “Morris Garages” brands. The Plaintiffs asserted that they were the registered proprietors of the “MG” marks in relation to automobiles and allied goods and services and had established substantial goodwill and reputation through their business operations, extensive dealership network, sales and promotional activities in India.

According to the Plaintiffs, complaints received from members of the public in May 2026 revealed that unknown individuals were using fraudulent email addresses and online platforms to solicit applications for dealerships. The Plaintiffs identified three impugned domain names: www.mgmotordealership.net, www.mgmotorco.in and www.mgmotordealership.com.

The Plaintiffs alleged that the websites and associated online content reproduced their stylised “MG” logos, Morris Garages branding, vehicle photographs, marketing material and website design. The platforms also displayed dealership application forms seeking personal and business particulars from prospective applicants, thereby creating the impression that the dealership opportunities were being offered by or on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

The Plaintiffs further placed on record communications indicating that members of the public had been deceived into making payments for purported dealership opportunities. One customer had allegedly paid ₹12,000/- as advance money. The amount was deposited into a bank account maintained with Indian Overseas Bank, with the beneficiary’s name appearing as “MG Motors”. The Plaintiffs accordingly sought urgent injunctive relief, suspension of the impugned domains, disclosure of relevant information by intermediaries and preservation of funds allegedly received through the fraudulent activities.

Issue before the Court

Whether the Plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for an ex-parte ad interim injunction against the alleged unauthorised use of their registered trademarks and copyrighted material, and whether urgent directions were warranted to suspend the impugned domain names, disclose identifying information and preserve the suspected proceeds of the alleged fraud.

Findings of the Court

The Court observed that the Plaintiffs were registered proprietors of the “MG” marks in relation to automobiles and allied goods and services and had been carrying on business in India under the Morris Garages “MG” brand since 2017. Having considered the material placed on record, the Court found that the Plaintiffs had established a prima facie case for interim protection, that the balance of convenience favoured them and that refusal of relief was likely to cause irreparable harm.

The Court noted that Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 were using identical “MG” marks and offering dealership opportunities to unsuspecting members of the public in a manner that created the impression that such opportunities were being offered by the Plaintiffs. Documents placed on record prima facie evidenced actual confusion and deception, including a payment made by a customer who believed that the dealership was being offered by or on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

The Court held that the use of the identical marks was prima facie actionable as trademark infringement under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. It further observed that the alleged conduct appeared intended to exploit the Plaintiffs’ established goodwill for unlawful monetary gain and prima facie amounted to passing off. The resulting confusion was also likely to dilute the distinctiveness of the “MG” marks and tarnish the reputation associated with the brand.

In view of the nature of the allegations and the material demonstrating the alleged misuse of the Plaintiffs’ branding, the Court considered it necessary to grant immediate protection and issue directions not only against the alleged infringers but also to the relevant domain name registrars, service providers and bank.

Held

The Court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction until the next date of hearing, restraining Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and persons acting on their behalf from using the Plaintiffs’ “MG” marks, deceptively similar website layouts, graphics, logos, images and other branding material. The restraint also covered the use of the marks in domain names, email IDs, social media handles and WhatsApp display pictures, as well as the offering of dealership or licensing services while falsely representing an association with the Plaintiffs. The restraint extended to conduct prima facie amounting to trademark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off.

The Court issued the following directions:

• Domain suspension: The concerned DNR Defendants, were directed to suspend the three impugned domains within 36 hours of receipt of the order and disclose relevant domain registration details, including payment particulars, within six weeks.
• Disclosure by intermediary: The concerned proxy registration service provider Defendant was directed to disclose available information concerning the user on whose behalf the fraudulent domain www.mgmotordealership.com was registered, including payment details, within six weeks.
• Preservation of funds: Indian Overseas Bank was directed to mark a lien on the identified bank account to the extent of ₹14,55,700/- within two weeks, until further orders, and provide available transaction history and KYC details within six weeks.
• Disclosure of subscriber information: The Department of Telecommunications was directed to provide available details, including KYC records, for the identified telephone numbers within four weeks. Google LLC was directed to provide available details relating to the identified email address within four weeks.

Conclusion

The order demonstrates the importance of effective judicial intervention where alleged trademark infringement is accompanied by online impersonation and financial fraud. By combining injunctive relief with domain suspension, disclosure obligations and preservation of suspected proceeds, the Court sought to protect the Plaintiffs’ intellectual property and reputation while facilitating the identification of those allegedly responsible. The findings are prima facie and the allegations remain subject to adjudication in the pending suit.

Last Updated on 16 October, 2026