Decisión del Panel Administrativo nº D2016-0588 of WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, May 19, 2016 (case Etechaces Marketing and Consulting Private Limited v. Atin Gupta)

Resolution DateMay 19, 2016
Issuing OrganizationWIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
DecisionTransfer
DominioGeneric Domains

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Etechaces Marketing and Consulting Private Limited v. Atin Gupta

Case No. D2016-0588

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Etechaces Marketing and Consulting Private Limited of Haryana, India, represented by Wadhwa Law Chambers, India.

The Respondent is Atin Gupta of Gwalior, India.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name [antipolicybazaar.com] is registered with eNom, Inc. (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on March 25, 2016. On March 29, 2016, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On the same date the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on April 4, 2016. The Respondent did not answer the Complaint within the stipulated period on or before the due date April 24, 2016 for filing Response in accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on April 25, 2016.

The Center appointed Ashwinie Kumar Bansal as the sole panelist in this matter on May 4, 2016. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.

On May 8, 2016 the Respondent has submitted a Supplemental Filing via email to the Center.

4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a company incorporated in the year 2008 under the laws of India. On September 25, 2014, the Complainant had incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary company under the name “Policybazaar Insurance Web Aggregator Private Limited”. The Complainant, through Policybazaar Insurance Web Aggregator Private Limited, owns and operates an online insurance comparison portal at “www.policybazaar.com.” The Complainant holds trademark registrations for the trademarks POLICY BAZAAR and POLICYBAZAAR.COM (the “Trademarks”) since December 17, 2008. The Complainant also holds trademark applications for the trademark POLICY BAZAR.

The disputed domain name was registered on February 14, 2016. At the time the Complaint was filed the Respondent was operating a website under the disputed domain name where he seemed to criticize the Complainant, but where there was also a “giveaway” of several watches for users who “liked” his Facebook page.

5. Parties’ Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant is operating a leading online insurance comparison portal under the Complainant’s Trademarks, which provides solutions to 5,000,000 Indian customers since 2008. During the year 2014, the Complainant’s website “www.policybazaar.com” received 8.1 million page views from 1.6 million users. In the year 2015, the domain name of the Complainant had 782 Alexa ranking in India and it has filed as evidence the Google Analytics Audience Overview for [policybazaar.com] for the period January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. The comparison engine of the Complainant is the result of intense research and periodic updating by a team of more than 1,500 employees. Leading funds like Intel Capital (Mauritius) Limited, Tiger GlobalEight Holdings, Inventus Capital Partners Fund II Limited, Ribbit Capital II, L.P have invested funds in the business of the Complainant through multiple rounds of funding. Since 2008, the Complainant has spent more than USD 18 million over advertising, promotion and branding for its Trademarks. The Complainant has won awards for the best financial website such as the Internet and Mobile Association of India (“IAMAI”) for two consecutive years (2013 and 2014) and E-commerce Website of the Year in 2015.

The Complainant has registered rights and common law rights in the Trademarks and the corresponding logo. The Complainant also owns several domain names formed with its Trademarks.

The disputed domain name [antipolicybazaar.com] incorporates the Trademark POLICYBAZAAR.COM in its entirety...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT