The Delhi High Court has ruled that Indian entities can lawfully import and sell second-hand goods bearing another entity’s trademark, provided specific disclosure requirements are met.

This judgment reinforces the principle of international exhaustion enshrined under Sections 30(3) and 30(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and clarifies that there is no blanket legal prohibition on the import of discarded or end-of-life goods into India.

Justice Amit Bansal, delivering the decision, relied on precedents such as Kapil Wadhwa v. Samsung Electronics [2012:DHC:6136:DB] and Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International [2024:DHC:4193]. The court affirmed that individuals or entities in India are legally entitled to import genuine trademarked goods from abroad and resell them in India, as long as clear disclosure is made that the goods are second-hand and not covered by the original manufacturer’s warranty.

Case Background:

The case stemmed from a complaint by the plaintiffs, leading to an interim injunction and the appointment of a local commissioner, who seized around 7,500 hard disk drives (HDDs) from a customs warehouse on October 29, 2019. Mediation efforts failed, and the matter proceeded to litigation.

Representing the defendant, Advocate Sidharth Chopra argued that the HDDs were genuine, second-hand, and lawfully imported after payment of all duties. He cited a 2012 CBEC circular permitting parallel imports of genuine goods without the trademark holder’s consent and stressed compliance with the disclosure norms upheld in Daichi (supra).

The plaintiffs, represented by Advocate Shwetasree Majumder, contended that the goods were meant for OEM use, and several drives were non-functional. They argued that the unauthorized resale would mislead consumers, harm their reputation, and impose unfair obligations regarding implied customer support. Additionally, they claimed non-compliance with the Legal Metrology Act.

Court's Findings

The Court held that the goods in question were genuine and could be imported and resold, subject to full disclosure. It clarified that under Indian law, there is no restriction on the import of second-hand or refurbished goods bearing a trademark, provided:

• The goods are not misrepresented in terms of warranty, remaining life, or usability.

• Clear and prominent disclosure is made that they are second-hand or refurbished.

• If refurbished, the disclosure standards from Daichi (supra) (para 116) must be followed.

• If sold without refurbishment, the disclosure guidelines from Xerox Corp. v. Shailesh Patel (CS (OS) 2349/2006) apply.

The Court also noted that the plaintiffs did not dispute the genuineness of the seized goods.

The Court allowed the defendant to import and sell genuine second-hand goods bearing the plaintiffs' trademarks, provided proper disclosures are made. As for the HDDs seized in 2019, the court permitted their release, on the condition that the defendant sells them only as scrap after removing all branding. The defendant was also permitted to pursue remedies related to demurrage charges.

The matter is next listed for hearing on September 15, 2025.

Case Title: Western Digital Technologies Inc. v. Hansraj Dugar [2025:DHC:3844]
For Plaintiffs: Advocates Shwetasree Majumder, Prithvi Singh, Devyasni Nath
For Defendant: Advocates Sidharth Chopra, Kanishk Kumar, Angad Makkar, Priyansh Kohli