Delhi High Court Restrains Agro Orbit Hub From Selling Unauthorised Products Bearing UPL Trademarks

The Delhi High Court on 16 October temporarily restrained Agro Orbit Hub Pvt. Ltd. from selling products bearing UPL Limited's trademarks without authorisation and directed the platform to remove the disputed listings within 72 hours of receiving the order, besides disclosing details of the sellers and others involved in the supply chain.

Justice Tejas Karia held that unauthorised use of registered trademarks to sell agrochemical products online can warrant an interim injunction where the alleged infringement threatens consumer trust and the trademark owners' goodwill. He held:

“The Defendants' sale of the Infringing Products is prima facie dishonest and nothing but an attempt to ride the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiffs' Marks so as to cause confusion in the market.”

UPL Limited and UPL Sustainable Agri Solutions Limited approached the Court alleging that Agro Orbit Hub was selling and promoting unauthorised or counterfeit crop-protection products through its website and mobile application.

The disputed products allegedly bore the plaintiffs' registered trademarks, including SAAFILIZER, IMIDA, LAGAAM, CENTURION, CUROFIX and QUICKPHOS. UPL alleged that the listings covered herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and seed treatments offered at prices considerably lower than those of its genuine products, potentially misleading buyers and damaging its brand reputation.

The plaintiffs stated that they learnt of the listings around June 2026 after receiving complaints from dealers and distributors. Their subsequent investigation allegedly revealed that the products were actively promoted on the platform under its “Popular Brand” section and featured in “Flash Deals” on its homepage, rather than merely appearing in search results.

The Court noted that the plaintiffs had demonstrated long and continuous use of their registered trademarks and established goodwill associated with them. It found a prima facie case for an ex parte ad-interim injunction, observing that the alleged conduct could lead consumers to associate the disputed products with UPL and erode consumer trust.

It restrained the defendants and those acting on their behalf from manufacturing, selling, advertising or otherwise dealing in the disputed products under the plaintiffs' trademarks or deceptively similar marks without authorisation and the requisite Principal Certificate. It also issued notice on the injunction application and directed the defendants to file their reply within four weeks of service.

The matter is listed for hearing on 27 January 2027.