The Delhi High Court has granted a dynamic injunction in favour of TATA Sons Pvt Ltd and TATA Consumer Products, enabling the companies to proactively block fraudulent websites misusing the TATA trademark to lure consumers into fake dealership and distributorship schemes. The order comes in response to a rising number of complaints received by the TATA Group since January 2025.
Trademark Misuse and Consumer Fraud
TATA approached the Court after discovering a network of fraudulent websites falsely claiming to offer business opportunities under the TATA brand. Victims were reportedly asked to pay an initial “registration fee” of Rs.25,000, followed by additional payments under various pretexts such as “Product Deposit,” “Renovation & Equipment Deposit,” and “Second Stock Purchase Deposit.” Once the funds were collected, the fraudsters ceased communication. The companies alleged that use of the TATA mark combined with terms like “dealership,” “distributorship,” and “consumer” misled the public into believing the sites were officially affiliated with the TATA Group. The scheme was found to be widespread and systematic, affecting multiple domains and exploiting the trust in the TATA brand.
Court Proceedings
Justice Amit Bansal, noting the deceptive and repetitive nature of the scam, issued a broad restraining order against unidentified (John Doe) defendants and their agents. The injunction prohibits any unauthorized use of the TATA trademark across domains, websites, email addresses, social media handles, bank accounts, and related materials.
The Court also directed Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) to suspend and lock fraudulent domain names in accordance with the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
Importantly, the Court allowed TATA to directly approach registrars in the future to suspend any domains that misuse the TATA mark alongside certain terms such as consumer, franchise, distributor, or dealership without having to initiate fresh court proceedings for each violation.
“In the event the plaintiff comes across domain names in the future which contain the trademark ‘TATA’ in conjunction with one or more of the words ‘consumer’, ‘franchise’, ‘distributor’, ‘distributorship’, ‘dealership’, or ‘dealer’, the plaintiff is permitted to seek immediate blocking,” the Court directed.
Implications
The order establishes a precedent-setting "dynamic plus plus injunction", which anticipates evolving fraudulent behaviour and empowers brand owners with tools for real-time enforcement. Legal experts suggest this could become a model for future online trademark protection and cyber enforcement strategies in India.