INDRP Disputes Review : Axalt Coating Systems, USA & Coatings Foreign IP Co LLC v. OM Narayan

In the given case, there are two complainants.

First Complainant : Axalt Coating Systems, USA & Coatings Foreign IP Co LLC, who is a leading global coatings company dedicated to the development, manufacture and sale of liquid and powder coatings.

Second Complainant:  Coatings Foreign IP Co, LLC is an entity organized and existing under the laws of USA, the second complainant owns the intellectual property in India and other countries outside USA.

Disputed domain:

Decision : Complainant emerges as the decree holder and respondent is ordered to pay the compensation of Rs. 10,00,000 to the complainant. towards the cost of proceedings

Case summary:

In the review we shall discuss the various tactics used by the complainant and how registering trade marks and your actions can be used against you during the proceedings.

The given dispute could have been prevented and would have saved time and money. Before the proceedings the respondent approached the complainant to solve the dispute amicably which would have been profitable for both the parties, however no settlement could be arrived between both the parties. The complainants own trademarks AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS/  AXALTA/ A AXALTA  (collectively referred as Axalta marks).  The complainants provided multiple documents to prove their claim over the domain name, like copy of trademark of AXALTA mark in India, the attached copy of domain name registrations that complainant already possesses which bear the AXALTA mark and Complainant provided the documents which shows the expense incurred by the complainant in order to promote the marks globally, they provided a screenshot of the disputed domain along with the screenshot of the email pitched to the complainant by the respondent in order to sell the disputed domain and also provided a document which defines net sales of three years which indirectly explains how AXALTA  mark has been proved beneficial to them and if it is infringed it could effect their business. The complainants issued the cease and desist notice, which was sent to the respondent because the disputed domain can cause confusion among the visitors because it used AXELTA marks without the authorization from the complaint. The counsel of complainants again contacted the respondent to explain him their rights on the disputed domain, but the respondent in return asked for 3 million dollars for transfer of the disputed domain in the favor of complainants. The documents provided by the complainant proves that the respondent doesn’t have any legitimate interest on the domain and the registration was made with bad faith in order to sell it to the complainant. The respondent filed no reply. If we observe closely we can notice how the complainants first establishes their legitimacy and indirectly prove that the disputed domain is much more useful to them than to the respondent. Then the complainant move forward by trapping the respondent via the basic grounds/ essentials to prove a bad faith, by using the respondent’s actions against himself. By providing a copy of the email that respondent used to pitch the domain and when he asked 3 million dollars for the transfer when the counsel of complainants contacted him enabled the complainants to prove that the domain was registered in bad faith.


The complainant emerges as the decree holder on following grounds:

  1. Respondent’s domain is identical or confusingly similar to a name, trademark or service mark with which the complainant holds rights.
  2. Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain.
  3. Respondent’s domain was registered or is being used in bad faith.

It was then held that the disputed domain “” be transferred to the complainant, and the respondent is ordered to pay the complainant the sum of Rs. 10,00,000 (rupees ten lakhs only) towards the cost of proceedings.

read the dispute in full detail –

Personal opinion:

This dreadful outcome could have been avoided all together. The respondent had enough chances to resolve the dispute amicably but he decided to fight a war which he could not win. One must research over the name before he/she registers, Such acts of infringement are not only unethical but can also land serious consequences plus it gives bad name to the domain industry. If you think you have accidentally registered a domain which infringes any trademark or can be proved as bad faith, please drop it while you still can.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *