Delhi High Court Protects Select CityWalk, Bars Use of Deceptively Similar “Global CityWalk” Mark

The Delhi High Court on 8 May granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining a real estate company from using the mark “Global CityWalk” for its proposed commercial project, holding that the impugned mark was deceptively similar to the registered trademarks of Select CityWalk.

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while allowing the application, restrained Garg Realtech from using the impugned mark pending adjudication of the suit. He held:

“A comparison of the competing marks leaves no manner of doubt as to the deceptive similarity between the two.”

Select CityWalk traced its adoption of the mark “CITYWALK” to 2004, when Select Infrastructure Limited first began using the brand.

The Saket-based Select CityWalk mall was subsequently developed under the “CITYWALK/SELECT CITYWALK” branding and commenced operations in October 2007. Over time, it expanded into one of Delhi's prominent retail destinations, spanning 6 acres and hosting over 175 brands in South Delhi.

The plaintiff submitted that it holds multiple registered trademarks, including “CITYWALK”, “SELECT CITYWALK”, “CITY WALKER”, and “SELECT CITYWALKER”, registered across Classes 35, 36, and 37.

The dispute arose after Select CityWalk discovered that Garg Realtech had filed a trademark application for “GLOBAL CITYWALK” in Class 36 in March 2023 on a “proposed to be used” basis. The Trade Marks Registry issued an examination report in August 2023 raising objections, which remained pending.

Select CityWalk issued a legal notice in February 2026 calling upon the defendants to desist from using the impugned mark.

Despite this, the defendants refused to comply and, by 2 March 2026, registered the domain name 'www.globalcitywalk.com' and began advertising a commercial real estate project under the “Global CityWalk” branding. The project, also registered on the UP RERA portal, is scheduled for completion by 30 June 2027.

The plaintiffs argued that the impugned mark wholly incorporated the dominant feature “CITYWALK”, with “GLOBAL” acting merely as a prefix, creating visual, phonetic, and conceptual similarity likely to mislead an average consumer into believing an association with Select CityWalk.

The Court accepted this contention and noted that both parties operated in the same field of commercial real estate development, increasing the likelihood of confusion.

On the issue of irreparable harm, the Court held that the balance of convenience lay in favour of the plaintiffs and observed that they would suffer injury to goodwill and reputation built over two decades, which could not be compensated monetarily.

Under the injunction, the defendants have been restrained from using “GLOBAL CITYWALK”, “CITYWALK”, or any deceptively similar mark in any manner, including as a trademark, trade name, logo, keyword, meta tag, hashtag, or domain name. They have also been prohibited from registering any further domain names containing “CITYWALK” and from using 'www.globalcitywalk.com'.

The matter is listed before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 6 August 2026 for completion of service and pleadings, and before the Court on 15 October 2026.