Delhi High Court

Don’t Take Franchise Of Starbucks! DHC Temporary Restrain Entities

The Delhi High Court has recently temporarily constrained a few unknown entities from holding themselves to be franchisees of Starbucks without any authorization.

Justice C Hari Shankar noticed that the Court was bound to interfere in the case where one of the imposters hold themselves out, without any authorization, to be a franchisee of Starbucks.
Hence, the Court registered the plaint as a suit.

The order stated, “The case being one of unauthorized imposters holding themselves out, without authorization, to be franchisees of the plaintiffs, the Court is bound to interfere. In the circumstances, let the plaint be registered as a suit.”

Therefore, Starbucks approached the Court alleging that several unknown entities were incorrectly claiming to be its authorized franchisees, and public misleads.

It brought to the Court’s notice that a few such domain names like starbucks-franchise.com, www.starbucksfranchise.in and starbucksfranchise.co.in.

Further, the plaint stated that the money earned by the unauthorised representatives was being deposited in a bank in Mumbai’s Lower Parel.

Hence, plaintiffs prayed that the Court restrain these entities from defrauding the public, and collecting money misappropriating.

After registering the plaint as a suit, the Court issued summons to the defendants and sought written statements within 30 days. In the application seeking interim injunctive relief, the Court issued the notice returnable on July 24, 2023.

However, it directed Google to disable an unauthorized email ID, starbucksdealership@gmail.com, and provide plaintiff’s details of the holder of the email ID.

Also, the Court directed the blocking of access to the domain names mentioned in the plaint.

Further, it conducted freezing of the bank account number mentioned in the plaint and directed the bank to disclose the identity of the holder to the Court. The Court ordered the blocking of a phone number mentioned by the plaintiffs and directed that the identity of the holder of the number be disclosed as well.

The blockings are to continue till the next date of the hearing.

Meera Verma

Recent Posts

Supreme Court Says “Marriage Is Relationship Built On Mutual Trust, Companionship”

The Supreme Court has upheld a decision by the Madras High Court granting a divorce…

2 days ago

Delhi HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Lawyer In Brother’s Criminal Case

The Delhi High Court has granted transit anticipatory bail to a lawyer whose brother is…

2 days ago

Justice Madan B Lokur Appointed As Chairperson of UN Internal Justice Council

Former Supreme Court Justice Madan B Lokur has been recently named the chairperson of the…

2 days ago

Karnataka High Court Directs NLSIU To Implement 0.5% Reservation For Transgender Persons

The Karnataka High Court has recently directed the National Law School of India University (NLSIU)…

2 days ago

Allahabad HC Directs UP Vigilance To Investigate Himalayan Cooperative Housing Land Issue

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh Vigilance Department to investigate the Himalayan…

2 days ago

Allahabad HC Grants Stay On Mohammed Zubair’s Arrest In Religious Enmity Case

The Allahabad High Court on Friday issued an order staying the arrest of Mohammed Zubair,…

2 days ago