Delhi High Court Restrains Use of “VRS ALLCARGO” in Trademark Dispute
The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to Allcargo Logistics Limited in a trademark infringement case against VRS All Cargo Packers and Movers Private Limited.
The Court restrained the rival company from using the mark “VRS ALLCARGO” or any other name that is deceptively similar to ALLCARGO, holding that such use is likely to confuse customers and amounts to trademark infringement and passing off.
Justice Tejas Karia, in an order dated December 1, observed that the defendants had adopted the word ALLCARGO in its entirety while offering identical logistics and relocation services. The Court noted that Allcargo holds valid trademark registrations for ALLCARGO across multiple classes and enjoys statutory protection for the mark as a standalone word mark.
The Court found that Allcargo had made out a strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience was in its favour. It also held that allowing the defendants to continue using the impugned mark would cause irreparable harm to Allcargo’s goodwill and reputation built over decades.
Accordingly, the defendants, along with their affiliates and agents, were restrained from using “VRS ALLCARGO” or any similar name for logistics-related services. The Court further directed domain registrars to suspend and block the websites vrsallcargopackers.com, vrsallcargopackers.in and vrsallcargo.in within 24 hours of receiving the order.
The Court noted that Allcargo has been using the ALLCARGO mark since the early 1990s and has established a strong market presence through long-standing use, significant revenues, and continuous promotional efforts. This, the Court said, has resulted in substantial goodwill and public recognition attached to the mark.
It was also observed that the defendants remained unrepresented despite service of notice. Given that the competing services were identical and offered through the same trade channels, including online platforms, the Court held that an average consumer was likely to be misled about the source of the services.
The matter is now listed for further hearing on March 17, 2026.
