Back
High Court Of Delhi
SURYA AGRO-OILS LTD. - Appellant
Versus
SURYA COCONUT OIL INDUSTRIES - Respondent
I.T.A. 6087 of 1989
Decided On : 05/01/1994
Trade Mark - Injunction - Use of 'surya' - The court refused to grant injunction restraining the defendant from using the trade mark 'surya' as it found no chance of confusion between the plaintiff's and defendant's marks.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff sought to restrain the defendant from using the trade mark 'surya' or any other trade name or trade mark identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade name and trade mark consisting of the device of 'surya'.
Finding of the Court:
The court refused to grant injunction with respect to the word 'surya' as it found no chance of confusion between the plaintiff's and defendant's marks.
Issues: The issue was whether the defendant should be restrained from using the trade mark 'surya' or any other trade name or trade mark identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade name and trade mark.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that there was no chance of confusion between the plaintiff's and defendant's marks, and therefore refused to grant injunction.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the application and ordered the parties to bring detailed suggested issues to court for framing of issues on a later date.
( 2 ) surya is the Hindi name of the sun . Sun as the centre of the solar system has existed for long long time, so has surya .
( 3 ) I do not think that any person can exclusively appropriate the word surya per se for himself. I am not inclined to grant injunction with respect to the word surya .
( 4 ) I have seen the sun device of the plaintiff. It is a half circle with lines radially projecting out of its circumference, alternate lines being long, and alternate lines being short.
( 5 ) HOWEVER, as per the registration certificate which has been filed by the defendant in Suit No. 1094 of 1989 and relied upon by the defendant in this suit, that device comprises of a very stylised representation of sun which has flames, or what appears to be flames, around its circumstance with eyes, nose and mouth.
( 6 ) KEEPING the two side by side, difference in the two are very dear. Whereas the device of the plaintiff has got the radial straight lines along the circumference of the half circle, the defendant has got curving flames around the circumference.
( 7 ) I do not think that any reasonable person can be confused, or deceived into believing that one mark is the same as the other. I do not think that there is any chance of confusion between the two marks in this case.
( 8 ) NEITHER can the half sun of Surya Agro Oils Ltd. be confused by any reasonable person as the mark of Surya Coconut Oil Industries, nor can the stylised surya mark of the Surya Coconut Oil Industries be confused by any reasonable person as the mark of the half sun of Surya Agro-Oils Ltd.
( 9 ) NEITHER of the parties are entitled to injunction against the other of them for restraining the other of them from using their own marks.
( 10 ) THE observations made herein are only for the purposes of this interlocutory application for injunction, and shall not in any way affect the matter of final determination of the respective rights of the parties.
( 11 ) I. A. stands disposed of. S. 2197/89
( 12 ) TO come up on 15-9-1994 for framing of issues. Parties to bring detailed suggested issues to Court on that date. Order accordingly.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
