When ₹3,360 Crore Meets a Missing Notice: The Amazon v. Lifestyle Trademark Drama

Sometimes, the biggest courtroom battles aren’t about who’s right or wrong, they’re about how the fight was handled. And in this case, the Supreme Court of India had to step in to stop what it called a “textbook case of procedural perversity.”

Yep, we’re talking about Amazon Technologies Inc. v. Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., a jaw-dropping trademark dispute where a ₹3,360 crore decree was passed without proper notice or pleadings. Let’s unpack what happened.

Amazon Technologies (yes, the global e-commerce giant) found itself staring at a massive judgment, ₹3,360 crore in damages, from Delhi High Court.

The decree came from a trademark infringement suit filed by Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd., which alleged unauthorized use of its trademark elements.

But here’s the catch:
Amazon claimed it wasn’t even properly served with the legal papers and never got a fair chance to defend itself before that gigantic decree landed.

The Supreme Court didn’t mince words. It noted that the decree was passed:

• Without proper service of notice to Amazon,
• Without clear pleadings or evidence, and
• Without detailed findings on how infringement or damages were actually made out.

In simple terms, the lower court had skipped every basic step of natural justice.

The judges called it “procedurally perverse” and said no company, not even a global giant, should be hit with such a massive decree without being properly heard.

As a result, the Supreme Court granted Amazon an unconditional stay on the execution of the decree. In other words, the ₹3,360 crore judgment is now frozen until further review.

This case is a strong reminder that due process matters, no matter how big the brand or how high the stakes.

Indian courts are very clear on one thing:

You can’t fast-track justice by skipping fairness.

Even in trademark suits, where injunctions and damages can move quickly, the courts are insisting on proper notice, pleadings, and reasoned findings before slapping defendants with huge liabilities.

It’s also a lesson for plaintiffs, procedural shortcuts might win you a quick order, but they rarely survive appellate scrutiny.

The Amazon v. Lifestyle decision isn’t about Amazon’s trademark rights just yet, it’s about how justice should be delivered. The Supreme Court’s message was simple but powerful:

“You can’t win by default when the other side wasn’t even properly called to the fight.”

And that’s something every IP litigator, and every brand owner, should take to heart.

Written by Mahesh Bhagnari | Trademark attorney in India

Trademark attorney in India

I, Mahesh Bhagnari, am the Managing Principal of the firm:

• I am an Attorney at Law with Bar Council Registration № MAH/1574/2003.
• I am licensed to practice at the Intellectual Property Office as a Patent attorney in India and Design attorney in India with Registration № IN PA 1108.
• I am licensed to practice as a Trademark attorney in India with Registration № 10742.
• I have more than twenty years of professional experience working in the field of Intellectual property.