The Delhi High Court has upheld the Arbitrator's decision to refuse an injunction against Winzo Games Private Limited in a dispute over the tagline "Jeeto Har DinZo" developed by Creativeland Advertising Private Limited. The ruling, delivered by Justice Subramonium Prasad, emphasized that there was no formal agreement between the parties regarding the tagline, and the claim was based solely on an alleged breach of confidentiality rather than copyright infringement.
Case Background
The dispute arose from a business arrangement between Creativeland Advertising, a creative agency specializing in brand campaigns, and Winzo Games, an online gaming platform. On October 11, 2024, Winzo Games initiated discussions with Creativeland Advertising for a brand campaign. Following this, a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) was executed on November 8, 2024.
Read Also: Supreme Court Scrutinizes Delhi HC's Senior Advocate Designation Process Amid Controversy
Creativeland Advertising presented multiple campaign concepts featuring the tagline "Jeeto Har DinZo." Winzo Games acknowledged the tagline's appeal but later incorporated it into its internal scripts. However, on February 4, 2025, Winzo Games unexpectedly ended discussions and offered Rs. 10 lakhs as compensation for the tagline.
On February 19, 2025, Creativeland Advertising sought an injunction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to restrain Winzo Games from using the tagline. The matter was referred to an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act.
The Arbitrator refused to grant the injunction, citing the following key points:
- There was no formal contract between the parties apart from the NDA.
- No fixed price was determined for the tagline.
- The tagline's ownership was contested, warranting further legal scrutiny.
- Compensation, rather than an injunction, was deemed the appropriate remedy.
Creativeland Advertising argued that:
- The NDA was meant to protect the tagline as intellectual property.
- Winzo Games' actions constituted "passing off" of the tagline.
- The Respondent should not be allowed to use the tagline merely by offering monetary compensation.
Read Also: Media and Judiciary: An Interdependent Relationship for True Independence
Winzo Games countered that:
- The tagline "Jeeto Har DinZo" was not exclusively created by Creativeland Advertising.
- The phrase "Khelo WinZo Jeeto Har DinZo" incorporated "WinZo," a registered trademark of the Respondent.
- The creative work was a collaborative effort, and Creativeland Advertising was entitled only to compensation for its services.
The Delhi High Court emphasized that its jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited, citing the case of World Window Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Central Warehousing Corpn. (2021):
"The scope of interference in appeals against orders passed by arbitrators under Section 17 is limited. Courts should refrain from interfering unless the award is shocking to the conscience."
Read Also: Court's Jurisdiction Under Section 11(6) Of The Arbitration Act: Key Ruling By Delhi High Court
The Court noted that the Arbitrator had correctly assessed the matter and determined that Creativeland Advertising had not established exclusive ownership over the tagline. The NDA’s Clause 8 allowed both parties to engage with other agencies, indicating that the agreement was inherently determinable.
The Court further observed that damages could be awarded if Creativeland Advertising could prove hardship in the arbitration proceedings. Since the Arbitrator’s ruling was not found to be egregiously flawed, the Court upheld the decision and dismissed the appeal.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Relieves Justice Yashwant Varma of Judicial Duties
Case Title: CREATIVELAND ADVERTISING PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. WINZO GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED
Case No.: ARB. A. (COMM.) 17/2025, I.A. 6222/2025
For Winzo Games: Mr. Abhishek Malhotra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Srishti Gupta, Mr. Kumarjeet Ray and Ms. Anukriti Trivedi, Advocates.
For Creativeland Advertising: Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Advocate with Mr Nishad Nadkarni, Mr Nirupam Lodha, Ms Khushboo Jhunjhunwala, Mr Kshitij Parashar, Mr Gautam Wadhwa, Ms Annanya Mehan Advocates.
Date of Judgment: 18.03.2025
