Delhi HC Orders Restoration Of Kamdhenu Idol Listings On Amazon, Restrains Repeated Takedown Complaints

The Delhi High Court recently (May 5) directed Amazon to reinstate certain deactivated listings of silver-plated Kamdhenu cow idols and restrained a rival seller operating under the brand name 'Svastika' from issuing further marketplace complaints alleging copyright or other intellectual property infringement against those products.

Justice Tejas Karia passed the ex-parte ad-interim order in a suit filed by Avaia Ventures Private Limited and Dev Aastha Impex against Wildship Enterprises Private Limited.

“In these circumstances, the repeated takedown complaints lodged by Defendant No. 1 appear to be a misuse of Amazon's intermediary complaint mechanism with a view to suppressing and undermining the Plaintiffs' business operations. Such conduct of Defendant No. 1 squarely attracts the remedy under Section 60 of the Act, which entitles any person aggrieved by groundless threats of legal proceedings or liability in respect of an alleged copyright infringement to seek relief therein. Accordingly, the threats issued by Defendant No. 1 are, prima facie, groundless within the meaning of Section 60 of the Act.”

The suit was filed by Avaia Ventures, an online retailer and reseller on e-commerce marketplaces, and Dev Aastha Impex, a manufacturer of silver-plated religious articles. The companies alleged that Wildship filed successive copyright infringement complaints with Amazon beginning on April 10, 2026, resulting in the deactivation of several listings for silver-plated Kamdhenu cow idols sold under the 'Dev Aastha' brand.

According to the plaintiffs, Amazon subsequently reinstated some of the listings on its own evaluation after considering their appeals. However, Wildship later filed fresh complaints against certain listings that had already been restored.

The court noted the plaintiffs' contention that Wildship had not instituted any infringement proceedings before a competent court and that its complaints did not identify any registered copyright or furnish material demonstrating originality.

Referring to its earlier decision in Associated Broadcasting Company Limited v. Google LLC, the court observed:

“the issuance of a copyright strike notice or platform-level takedown complaint, without the institution and diligent prosecution of a meaningful infringement action before a competent Court, constitutes a 'groundless threat' within the meaning of Section 60 of the Act.”

The court also recorded that Wildship had not instituted any infringement suit as on the date of filing of the present suit and that its reply to the legal notice issued by Avaia Ventures and Dev Aastha Impex did not disclose clear particulars of copyright registration, originality or prior use.

The court further observed:

“Moreover, Defendant No. 1 has itself admitted that the differences between the Plaintiffs' products and its own products are merely superficial. In view thereof, any claim of substantial similarity cannot, at this stage, be sustained on the basis of the complaints filed by Defendant No. 1.”

Finding that Avaia Ventures and Dev Aastha Impex had established a prima facie case, the court restrained Wildship from issuing further marketplace complaints alleging copyright or other intellectual property infringement in respect of the specified products.

The court also directed Amazon to reinstate the affected listings, if not already restored, and remove consequential infringement records corresponding to the complaints lodged by Wildship.

The matter is next listed on September 2, 2026.