Full Judgment Text
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
% Date of decision: 26 March, 2025
+ CS(COMM) 71/2024 with I.A. 1822/2024
PEAK XV PARTNERS ADVISORS
INDIA LLP & ANR. .....Plaintiffs
Through: Mr. Akshay Maloo, Mr. Yatinder
Garg and Ms. Astha Sehgal,
Advocates.
versus
JOHN DOE & ORS. .....Defendants
Through: Mr. Vedansh Anand, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The present suit has been filed seeking relief of permanent injunction
restraining the defendants from passing off the trademark, along with other
ancillary reliefs.
ASE SETUP IN THE LAINT
C P
2. Plaintiff no. 1, Peak XV Partners Advisors India LLP, formerly
Sequoia Capital India LLP, is a venture capital and investment advisory firm
that advises foreign funds investing in India and Southeast Asia under the
brand ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’.
3. Plaintiff no. 2, Peak XV Partners Operations LLC, formerly Sequoia
Capital India Operations II LLC, is a Mauritius-based company regulated by
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 1 of 10
the Mauritius Financial Services Commission as an ‘Investment Advisor
(Restricted)’.
4. The plaintiffs provide investment advisory services to funds
supporting startups across various sectors, including artificial intelligence,
machine learning fintech, health-tech, climate-tech etc. across India and
SouthEast Asia.
5. The plaintiff no.1 started its operations in India in 2006 as ‘Sequoia
Capital India’, as an authorized user of ‘Sequoia Capital’. In June 2023,
Sequoia Capital & SEA was rebranded to PEAK XV PARTNERS.
6. It is stated that the brand name ‘PEAK XV’ is inspired by the original
moniker given to Mount Everest in the 1850s by the British Survey before it
was officially renamed. For the plaintiffs, the name ‘PEAK XV’ symbolizes
the relentless pursuit of excellence by its founders despite challenges.
7. Since its rebranding to ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’ in June 2023, the
Plaintiffs have invested substantial efforts and resources in promoting and
establishing the brand as a distinctive mark associated with its longstanding
reputation in India. These efforts have been widely covered by third-party
media platforms, which are detailed in paragraph 16 of the plaint.
8. The plaintiff no.2 has applied for trade mark registration for its word
and device marks ‘PEAK XV’ and the same is currently pending
consideration before the Trade Marks Registry. The details of the trademark
application are given in paragraph 19 of the plaint.
9. The plaintiffs operate the website www.peakxv.com, registered by the
plaintiff no.2 on June 5, 2023. The website prominently displays the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 2 of 10
trademarks, ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’
, and provides information about its team, investment programs, and
portfolio companies.
10. Plaintiff no.1 also maintains active social media accounts on
platforms like Twitter (now X) and Instagram, where the ‘PEAK XV
PARTNERS’ trademarks are consistently featured.
11. It is stated that the plaintiff no. 1 has played a pivotal role in India's
venture capital landscape, making significant investments in companies such
as Groww, Meesho, Razorpay, Oyo Rooms, Zomato, FreeCharge, Just Dial,
Equitas Holdings, Citrus Payment Solutions, and Urban Ladder, among
others. Over the years, the plaintiff no.1 has advised thirteen (13) funds that
have invested in over 400 startups, with more than fifty (50) portfolio
companies valued at $1 billion. The firm has also facilitated nineteen (19)
IPOs and M&A deals, generating $4.5 billion in realized exits.
12. On June 6, 2023, as part of a global restructuring, Sequoia Capital
Operations, LLC and plaintiff no.2 announced the division of Sequoia
Capital into three independent entities focusing on different regions.
Consequently, plaintiff no.1 and plaintiff no.2 transitioned into autonomous
entities ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’. It is averred that the firm's senior
management, well-regarded in the industry, continues to drive the plaintiffs’
growth, with its activities including fundraising, investments, and industry
initiatives.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 3 of 10
13. Defendant no. 1 [John Doe/ the Impersonators] is operating a
fraudulent trading and investment scheme through the website
https://pakxv.ioyppp.com/ and the mobile application ‘PAK XV’,
misrepresenting itself as affiliated with the plaintiffs.
14. Defendant no.2 is the domain name registrar of the domain hosting
the fraudulent website.
15. Defendant no.3 (erstwhile defendant no.9) [Bharti Airtel] is
impleaded for suspension of the mobile number +91 8271422399, which is
being used by the Impersonators to deceive the public.
16. The erstwhile defendants Meta Inc. (defendant no. 3), Telegram FZ-
LLC (defendant no.4), the Ministry of Electronics and Information
Technology (defendant no.5), the Department of Telecommunications
(defendant no. 6), the Impersonators’ bank (defendant no.7), Google LLC
(defendant no.8) were impleaded to prevent the fraudulent activities of the
impersonators. Subsequent to orders passed by this court, these defendants
have been deleted after complying with the court orders.
17. In December 2023, plaintiff no.1 discovered the activities carried out
by the defendant no.1 through its website and the mobile application. The
plaintiffs found that defendant no.1’s branding, including the domain name,
colour scheme, and trademarks Pak XV'
were deceptively
similar to ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’ . The platform falsely claimed to offer
investment opportunities such as IPOs, Venture Capital Services (‘VCS’),
and Value-averaging Investment Plans (‘VIPs’). Further, it also
unauthorizedly reproduced a promotional video from the plaintiffs’ website,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 4 of 10
copied the ‘About Us’ section, and offered misleading investment schemes
such as ‘Pakxv-VCS: 102’, promising unrealistic returns.
18. The defendant no.1 also provided WhatsApp and Telegram contact
options that redirected users to groups named ‘Peak XV 1026’ and
‘Peak XV Group’, where the impersonators falsely claimed to be Mr.
Shailendra Singh and Mr. Rajan Anandan, both Managing Directors at
plaintiff no.1 company. These impersonators actively engaged with the
public and potential investors, soliciting investments under false pretences
while disseminating misleading information to create an illusion of
legitimacy. Since the actual identity of defendant no.1 was unknown,
defendant no.1 was arrayed as John Doe .
th
19. On 8 December, 2023, plaintiff no.1 issued legal notices, to
WhatsApp and Telegram, requesting the takedown of the groups ‘Peak XV
1026’ and ‘Peak XV’ and the removal of the associated phone numbers
th
and usernames. On 30 December, 2023, Telegram confirmed the removal
th
of the ‘Peak XV’ group. On 9 January 2024, WhatsApp responded, stating
that it had reviewed the complaint and taken appropriate action in
accordance with its policies.
P ROCEEDINGS IN THE S UIT
th
20. The suit came before the court for the first time on 24 January 2024,
and the court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction restraining defendant
no.1 from using the trade names/ marks ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’
. Further, this court directed Meta
Platforms Inc., Telegram FZ-LLC, Google LLC, and Bharti Airtel Ltd. to
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 5 of 10
take down, remove, and block access to the accounts, URLs, and mobile
numbers carrying out the aforesaid activities. The court also directed
IndusInd Bank Limited , to disable the UPI IDs used by defendant no.1 for
carrying out the aforesaid websites.
th
21. On 12 March 2024, the predecessor bench of this court allowed the
application of the plaintiff for impleadment of WhatsApp LLC as defendant
no.10 in the present suit. Further court directed the WhatsApp LLC to take
down, remove, and block access to the accounts, and mobile numbers
carrying out the aforesaid activities.
th
22. On 18 March 2025, this court noted that the relief qua defendants
no.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10, stands satisfied and the court deleted the aforesaid
defendants from the array of parties. Further, it was noted that the suit
survives qua only defendants no.1, 2 and 9. Since none had entered an
appearance on behalf of defendants no.1 and 2, on the same date, the said
defendants were proceeded against ex-parte . It is also noted that despite the
service of erstwhile defendant no.9, neither the defendant no.9 has complied
with the orders passed by this court nor has entered an appearance.
A NALYSIS AND F INDINGS
23. I have heard the submissions of the plaintiff and also perused the
material on record.
24. The plaint has been duly verified and is also supported by the affidavit
of the plaintiff. In view of the fact that no written statement has been filed
on behalf of the defendants, all the averments made in the plaint have to be
taken to be admitted. Further, since no affidavit of admission/denial has
been filed on behalf of the defendants in respect of the documents filed with
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 6 of 10
the plaint, in terms of Rule 3 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules
2018, the same are deemed to have been admitted. Therefore, in my opinion,
this suit does not merit trial and the suit is capable of being decreed in terms
of Order VIII Rule 10 of CPC.
25. From the averments made in the plaint and the evidence on record, the
plaintiffs have been able to prove that they have proprietary rights over the
trademark ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’ and other formative marks.
26. The plaintiff has placed on record images of defendant no.1’s
impugned trademarks/packaging to show that defendant no.1 is indulging in
passing off of the plaintiff’s mark, ‘PEAK XV PARTNERS’ and other
formative marks. The similarities between the plaintiff’s marks/website/
mobile applications and the defendant no.1’s impugned marks/website/
mobile applications are set out below:
P LAINTIFFS ’ W EBSITE D EFENDANT NO .1’ S I MPUGNED
WEBSITE / MOBILE APPLICATION
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 7 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 8 of 10
27. The plaintiff’s name and marks have been used by defendant no.1
with the clear intent to defraud and deceive the public. It is apparent that
defendant no.1 is attempting to defraud the public by falsely claiming to
offer investment advice through WhatsApp/Telegram Groups, website and
mobile which they claim are associated with the plaintiff. The unauthorized
actions of defendant no.1, including the creation and operation of fraudulent
WhatsApp/Telegram groups, websites and mobile apps, have given rise to
substantial confusion, leading individuals to falsely believe that the
impugned groups and website are authorized, associated, and affiliated with
the plaintiff.
28. Based on the discussion above, a case of passing off is made out. The
defendant no.1 has taken unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of
the plaintiffs’ marks and has also deceived the unwary consumers of their
association with the plaintiff by dishonestly adopting the plaintiff’s mark
without any plausible explanation.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 9 of 10
29. At this stage, it may be relevant to note that defendant no.1, the
contesting defendant, is an unknown entity who is passing off the plaintiff’s
mark and logo. Since, defendant no.1 has failed to take any requisite steps to
contest the present suit, despite having suffered an ad-interim injunction
order, it is evident that it has no defence to put forth on merits.
30. Accordingly, the plaintiff is entitled to restrain the aforesaid defendant
from using the plaintiff’s name and marks without authorization from the
plaintiff.
ELIEF
R
31. In view of the foregoing analysis, a decree of permanent injunction is
passed in favour of the plaintiff and against defendant no.1 in terms of
prayer clause 52(a) of the plaint.
32. Further, in terms of relief claimed in prayer clause 52 (h) against
defendant no.3 (erstwhile defendant no.9) a decree is passed in favour of the
plaintiff and against defendant no.3 directing it to suspend the mobile
number +91 8271422399 used by defendant no.1 to deceive the members of
the general public and also provide KYC details of the registrant.
33. Counsel for the plaintiff does not press for the remaining reliefs
claimed in the plaint.
34. Let the decree sheet be drawn up.
35. All pending applications stand disposed of.
AMIT BANSAL, J
MARCH 26, 2025
kd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VIVEK MISHRA
Signing Date:01.04.2025
16:44:13
CS(COMM) 71/2024 Page 10 of 10