Both parties sell Sarees.
Hakoba Lifestyle Limited filed the case against Mukesh Shah of New York.
The Complainant owns hakoba.in and sells sarees (saris). The Respondent is also in the business of selling sarees, and registered Hakoba.com way back in 1998.
The panel found that the domain name was not registered and used in bad faith, which should have been pretty clear from the outset. If anything, this case is about trademarks, not cybersquatting.
Panelist Adam Taylor found this to be a case of reverse domain name hijacking. His rationale was fairly generic, but it seems quite clear that the respondent had a legitimate interest in the domain name and it wasn’t registered in bad faith.
The respondent won even though it offered to license hakoba.com for USD 500,000 because:
… The Complainant has provided no evidence suggesting that the Respondent had the Complainant in mind when, in 1998, it registered the first of the disputed domain names and started using the name “hakoba sarees”.
The Complainant’s United States trade mark was filed in 2004 and the Indian trade marks owned by the Complainant’s related company were filed in 2003.
…
http://trademarkpro.org/hakoba-com-rdnh-hakoba-lifestyle-limited-v-mukesh-shah-wipo-case-no-d2017-0675