The Delhi High Court has granted an ex parte interim injunction in favour of Zepto Limited and its subsidiary, restraining the defendants from using the marks "ZEPTO FINANCE" and other deceptively similar variants. The Court held that the plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case, observing that continued use of the impugned marks was likely to cause confusion among consumers and could harm the goodwill attached to the registered ZEPTO trademark.
Background of the Case
Zepto Limited and its wholly owned subsidiary approached the High Court alleging that the defendants were operating financial services under the names "ZEPTO FINANCE" and similar marks through a website and social media accounts. According to the plaintiffs, the ZEPTO brand has been extensively used since 2021 for quick-commerce services and has expanded into digital payment wallet and "Buy Now Pay Later" offerings under the trademarks ZEPTO CASH and ZEPTO PAY LATER.
The plaintiffs submitted that they discovered the defendants' use of the disputed marks in March 2026 and issued cease-and-desist notices. However, the defendants denied infringement and did not withdraw their trademark applications despite further
Court's Observations
Justice Jyoti Singh noted that the plaintiffs had established extensive use and reputation of the ZEPTO trademark across India. The Court took into account the company's registered trademarks, its nationwide operations, consumer recognition, and expansion into financial and credit-related services.
The Court observed:
"The Plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction against the Defendants. Balance of convenience lies in favour of the Plaintiffs and they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the interim injunction... is not granted."
The bench further found that the material placed on record indicated actual public confusion. It referred to instances where legal notices and court summons meant for the defendants had reached the plaintiffs because of the similarity between the rival marks. The Court also noted the plaintiffs' contention that consumers had mistakenly associated the defendants' loan-related activities with Zepto.
Court's Decision
Allowing the application for interim relief, the Delhi High Court restrained the defendants, as well as anyone acting on their behalf, from directly or indirectly advertising, promoting, marketing, or rendering services using "ZEPTO FINANCE" or any other mark identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' registered ZEPTO trademarks until the next date of hearing.
The Court also directed the plaintiffs to comply with the requirements of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure within two weeks.
Case Details
Case Title: Zepto Limited & Anr. v. Sailendra Kashyap & Ors.
Case Number: CS(COMM) 752/2026
Judge: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh
Decision Date: 22 July 2026
-300x169.webp)
