4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Aug 5, 2026 02:20 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has restrained a Patna-based real estate company from using the NINTENDO name in a trademark dispute filed by Japanese gaming giant Nintendo Co Ltd, known for popular video game franchises like Super Mario Bros, Pokémon and Donkey Kong. It held that the Indian firm’s name was deceptively similar to the Japanese company’s registered trademark and could confuse consumers.
Justice Jyoti Singh observed that one of the directors of Nintendo India Private Limited conceded in writing that the company did not intend to use the mark in future.
“NINTENDO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED…trade name is deceptively similar to Plaintiff’s trade name NINTENDO CO LTD and the NINTENDO marks, and owing to the similarity, there is every likelihood of confusion amongst members of the public and trade. Prima facie, plaintiff has acquired a reputation of a threshold required under Section 29(4) of the 1999 Act and has the statutory right to restrain the Defendants from using the deceptively similar trade name in respect of their real estate business,” the July 29 order said.
Justice Jyoti Singh heard the matter involving the use of the trademark ‘Nintendo’.
Nintendo Japan vs Nintendo India: Trademark dispute
In the trademark infringement suit filed against Nintendo India Private Limited before the Delhi High Court, the Japanese firm Nintendo Co Ltd stated that it had been using the NINTENDO name since 1889 and owns several trademark registrations, including in India. It claimed the mark is a coined and well-known trademark with a worldwide reputation.
The company stated that its products, including the Nintendo Switch, Super Mario Bros, Pokémon, and Donkey Kong, are widely known across the globe and have significant user base in India. In 2025, it discovered that a company named Nintendo India Private Limited had been incorporated in India. After an investigation, it was revealed that the company was engaged in the real estate business and had no trademark application for “Nintendo” and did not have an online presence.
Nintendo sent a cease and desist notice to the defendant company on February 17, 2026, asking them to stop using the name. When it did not receive any response, it approached the court seeking protection of its trademark rights.
Pravin Anand for Nintendo submitted that one of the directors of Nintendo India Private Limited, through an email, had informed the court that the Indian company did not intend to use the name in future and had never used it for any business activity, and they are willing to accept a permanent injunction against the woman director. While other defendants were not present before the court, the counsel requested the court to hear the plea for an interim injunction without hearing the other side.
Story continues below this ad
Relying on the provisions of the Trade Mark Act, 1999, the counsel argued that it has the right to restrain the defendants from using a deceptively similar trade name/company’s name even in respect of dissimilar goods, and that the use of the trade name is taking unfair advantage of and the distinctive character and repute of the NINTENDO marks.
Interim injunction granted
The court observed that Nintendo Co Ltd had made out a prima facie case for grant of an ex parte interim injunction against the Indian company with the same name. It held that the balance of convenience was in favour of Nintendo and it was likely to suffer irreparable harm in case the interim injunction was not granted.
The court noted that “NINTENDO” is a coined word and a registered trademark of Nintendo, which has been used since 1889 in Japan. The company in India, named “NINTENDO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED”, which was nearly identical and deceptively similar to Nintendo’s trade name and trademarks, could confuse the public.
The court directed the Indian firm to comply with the order within two weeks, and restrained the company and all persons acting on its behalf from using the name “NINTENDO India Pvt Ltd” or the NINTENDO mark in any manner that infringes Nintendo’s trademarks until the next hearing.
