INDRP - IN Domain Disputes

  • Home
  • INDRP
  • Pending
  • Hall of Fame
  • UDRP
  • FAQs
  • Contact
You are here: Home / INDRP / INDRP – HuntNews.in – Procedural History
INDRP – HuntNews.in – Procedural History

INDRP – HuntNews.in – Procedural History

July 13, 2016 by Domain Lawyer Leave a Comment

INDRP ARBITRATION
THE NATIONAL INTERNET EXCHANGE OF INDIA [NIXI]
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Eterno Infotech Pvt. Ltd. V Zheng Wei <www.HuntNews.in>
SOLE ARBITRATOR: ANKUR RAHEJA, FCS LLB MCA

ARBITRATION AWARD

Dispute Domain Name: HuntNews.in

Procedural History:

  1. Arbitrator received an email, inquirying if Nixi can avail of its services as an arbitrator for the dispute pertaining to the domain name <huntnews.in>. Arbitrator confirmed availability and sent the signed Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and independence as required by rules.
  2. The .IN Registry appointed Ankur Raheja as the sole Arbitrator on 31 March 2016 and Arbitrator received the hard copy of the Complaint along with Annexures on 01 April, 2016. 
  3. Arbitral Proceedings commenced on 4 April 2016 by issue of a notice by the Arbitrator by email to the Respondent email IDs – zw81783@126.com and postmaster@huntnews.in, directing Respondent to file his response to the Complaint by 20 April 2016, which was successfully delivered on the WHOIS Email ID zw81783@126.com. But in terms of INDRP rules, the email was also additionally marked to postmaster@huntnews.in.
  4. In the said notice, additionally, the Complainant was requested to provide soft copy of the Complaint to the Respondent to expedite the proceedings, which was duly complied with on 04th April 2016 itself. Also, the hard copy of the Complaint that was already dispatched by Nixi on 31 March 2016 and was duly delivered on the WHOIS address on 04 April 2016, as per the online delivery report.
  5. That the Respondent failed to file any response to the said timeline of 20 April 2016, therefore a new timeline was provided for filing of the Response as 28th April, 2016 to the Respondent by service of notice reminder on WHOIS email ID and postmaster@huntnews.in.
  6. The Respondent failed again to respond to the said INDRP complaint or notices thereof, therefore, in default in terms of Rule 11 of INDRP Rules of Procedure, matter was ordered to be proceeded ex-parte on Friday, 29 April 2016, in terms of INDRP rules.
  7. That on Tuesday, the 03 May 2016, the Respondent’s Representative tried to contact Nixi and asking for status of the proceeding. The request was forwarded to the Arbitrator but the permission was denied due to the reasons that though all the proceedings were marked to the Respondent but still the so called Representative showed ignorance as to the proceedings and further, no authority was produced or proved, in any case, by the said Representative.
  8. That later on 10 May 2016, the said Representative took proper route and emailed again giving reasons for delay in responding and with a request to allow a final opportunity to respond, claiming the disputed domain name in no manner infringes upon the Complainant’s domain name or trademark. And said Representative was asked by the Arbitrator to produce proper Power of Attorney, which was provided on 13 May 2016.
  9. That on 14th May 2016, the Complainant was provided an opportunity to respond to the Respondent’s request by 17 May 2016, but they fail to file any response/objections even till late on 18 May 2016, and it seemed appropriate, in the interest of justice, to provide a final opportunity to the Respondent to respond to the Complaint and the same was granted subject to payment of costs of Rs 5,000/-.
  10. Though only later, on 19 May 2016, after an opportunity was already provided to the Respondent, the Complainant issued objections, However, since Respondent were already afforded an opportunity in the interest of justice, therefore the objections on this ground could not be entertained.
  11. The Response was filed on 25 May 2016, and the Respondent was willing to pay for costs of Rs 5,000 but Complainant’s representative could not provide details as to the name in which the cheque should be issued even after reminders till 31 May 2016, citing the reason of non-availability of the concerned person at the Complainant Company, and assuring to make available the information at the earliest.
  12. Therefore, matter was proceeded further and on 31st May 2016 itself, the Complainant was provided an opportunity to file a rejoinder by 7 June 2016. The rejoinder was filed in time by the Complainant and also they provided the details for payment of costs ordered.
  13. Further, the parties were asked to file Written Arguments by 15 June 2016, which were compiled within the timeline by both the Complainant and the Respondent.
  14. The costs of Rs 5,000 were sent by the Respondent vide a cheque through bluedart courier on 27th June 2016, and delivered to the Complainant on 28th June 2016, as per online delivery report.
  15. Due to the Respondent’s late intervention in these INDRP proceedings on 10 May 2016 seeking opportunity to respond, the 60 days timeline for INDRP decision (from the date of commencement of Proceedings i.e. 04 April 2016) had to be extended by another 30 days in terms of Para 5(c) of INDRP rules of procedure. And the procedural formalities continued till 15 June 2016, when the written arguments were submitted by the parties. The extended 30 days period were to end on 02 July 2016 in terms of Para 4(c) of INDRP Rules of Procedure.
  16. Personal hearing was requested by the Respondent on 21 June 2016, i.e. after 6 days of filing of Written Arguments but no hearing was granted not only due to the approaching (extended) timeline but Arbitrator also felt there were no exceptional circumstances in terms of Rule 10 of the INDRP Rules of Procedure to grant a personal hearing.
  17. The language of these proceedings is in English.

Similar Posts:

  • INDRP – HuntNews.in – Discussion and Findings – Preliminary
  • INDRP – HuntNews.in – Decision
  • Most detailed decisions in INDRP
  • Shortest INDRP Decision
  • INDRP over StarPoker.in filed again, after Delhi High Court sets aside previous unfavorable decision

Filed Under: INDRP

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Keep up with he latest on Domain Name Disputes. Sign up with your email address to receive updates !

AD

Popular Posts

Mozilla files for Firefox Domains .IN Domain Dispute Resolution Policy

Posted on April 11, 2015
01

Hotel Chain files for Domain Dispute against ParkPlaza.in

Posted on March 18, 2015
02

Breitling SA files twin Domain Disputes under INDRP

Posted on March 30, 2015
03

Mont Blanc files for INDRP, both for .in and .co.in domains

Posted on May 18, 2015
04
lens.in domain dispute

INDRP filed against in-use Generic Domain Lens.in

Posted on April 19, 2015
05

Random Posts

New INDRP Arbitrators Appointed

The number of Arbitrators was 15 until September 2014 and the fees charged for INDRP matter was Rs … [Read More...]

INDRP Decisions 2014

INDRP/555 Newaysindia.in Tuesday, January 7, … [Read More...]

Legal Panel Discussion on Domain Disputes @ DomainX 2014

… [Read More...]

Domain Dispute filed against Mahindra.in under INDRP

Mahindra Group has filed for a Domain Dispute against domain name Mahindra.in with Nixi/.In Registry … [Read More...]

JaguarLandRover.co.in Decision

In the matter of JaguarLandRover.co.in, the Domain has been ordered to be transferred to the … [Read More...]

Contact Us

Please visit here to contact and we would try to get in touch with you, as soon as possible. Thanks !

What’s New !

  • AXIS AB Sweden wins domain dispute over axixsecurityservices.in
  • Benchmade Knife Co. files INDRP over BenchMade.in
  • INDRP/1059: Indeedonline.in transferred away to INDEED Inc. under INDRP process
  • Complaint denied in the matter of VRBO.co.in to US Company HOMEAWAY.COM, INC
  • Payoneer wins right to Payoneer.co.in under INDRP process
  • INDRP/1051: Indeed Job Portal grabs third level domain name – www.indeedjobs.ind.in
  • INDRP/1047: Domain Dispute Decision for vNext.in (Complainant: Visaka Industries Limited)

Social

View on Facebook
Domain Disputes
Domain Disputes

British company PokerStars is an online poker cardroom owned by Rational Intellectual Holdings Ltd. It filed INDRP over domain name StarPoker.in in 2017 but the Complaint was denied. Therefore, the British Company went into appeal and had re-initiated another INDRP in 2018, after the previous INDRP award was set aside... ... See MoreSee Less

PokerStars grabs domain name StarPoker.in in second INDRP attempt ! - INDRP - IN Domain Disputes

indrp.com

British company PokerStars is an online poker cardroom owned by Rational Intellectual Holdings Ltd. It filed INDRP over domain name StarPoker.in in 2017 but the Complaint was denied. Therefore, the British Company went into appeal and had re-initiated another INDRP in 2018, after the previous INDRP....
View on Facebook
·Share

Domain Disputes
Domain Disputes

While Idea Cellular Ltd and Vodafone Plc were negotiating merger, Vodafone filed for Domain Name Dispute over VodafineIdea.in and just grabbed a month before they announced completion of the USD 23.2 billion (approximately Rs 1.6 lakh crore) merger. The merged entity, will be known as Vodafone Idea Ltd. ... See MoreSee Less

Vodafone grabs VodafoneIdea.in before merger announcement - INDRP - IN Domain Disputes

indrp.com

While Idea Cellular Ltd and Vodafone Plc were negotiating merger, Vodafone filed for Domain Name Dispute over VodafineIdea.in and just grabbed a month before they announced completion of the USD 23.2 billion (approximately Rs 1.6 lakh crore) merger. The merged entity, will be known as Vodafone Idea....
View on Facebook
·Share

Domain Disputes shared CyLaw's post.
Domain Disputes

CyLaw

CyLaw Solutions successfully defended Digel.com in a UDRP (Domain Disputes) proceedings brought by DIGEL.de Germany...
domaingang.com/domain-law/indian-domainer-wins-udrp-filed-against-the-domain-digel-com/
View on Facebook
·Share

Copyright © 2019 All Rights Reserved · INDRP.com · Disclaimer · Log in

Disclaimer: This website is not affiliated to .IN Registry / NIXI and the sole purpose is to spread knowledge about the Domain Dispute policy, INDRP decisions and it's process !
  • Home
  • INDRP
  • Pending
  • Hall of Fame
  • UDRP
  • FAQs
  • Contact