The Bench had on March 15 ordered Rathee to remove the relevant part from the video. It said that Rathee, in publishing and circulating the video, also contravened the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957.
“The unauthorized use of the packaging, label and logo of the product Real in the impugned video violates the trademark and copyright protection afforded to the petitioner and is impermissible. In my view, the petitioner’s product Real has been specifically targeted, denigrated and discredited in the impugned video.”
However, on a subsequent hearing held on March 24, it was informed that the video continues to be aired on his channel.
“It is the plain and unqualified obligation of any person against or in respect of whom an order is made by a Court to obey the same unless and until the order has been set aside, modified or varied. The uncompromising nature of this obligation is fundamental to the Rule of Law,” the Court observed in the latter order.
Noting that there has been no compliance with the order passed on March 15, the Court said,
“In view of the incalculable damage which the impugned video may have,in my view, the balance of convenience and irreparable injury is overwhelmingly in favour of further orders being passed. In this backdrop, the respondents are directed to take down/remove/block and restrain access to the impugned video from all the URL/Web Links.”
Source: Barandbench
