JUDGMENT

I.A. 6811/2021 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC)

1. The plaintiff Khadi & Village Industries Commission (KVIC) has, by the present suit, alleged that the defendant Khadi Design Council of India (KDCI) is not entitled to use the word KHADI as any part of any word or device mark for any purpose whatsoever, as KHADI, both as a word mark as well as part of various device marks, stands registered in the plaintiff's favour under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

2. The plaintiff is the registered proprietor of

(i) the word mark KHADI

(a) in Classes 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 34, 35, 38 and 42 with effect from 27th November 2014, claiming user since 25th September 1956, and

(b) in Class 22 with effect from 28th November 2014 claiming user since 4th October 2014

(ii) the device mark [IMG] in Classes 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 34, 35, 38 and 42 with effect from 19th June 2018, claiming user since 25th September 1956,

(iii) the device mark [IMG]

(a) in Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38 and 42 with effect from 2nd December 2014, claiming user since 31st May 2000, and

(b) in Classes 12 and 13 with effect from 31st March 2020, claiming user since 25th September 1956,

(iv) the device mark [IMG] in

(a) Classes 24 and 25 with effect from 18th October 2019, claiming user since 25th September 1956, and

(b) Class 35 with effect from 18th October 2019, claiming user since 22nd July 2013 and

(v) the device mark [IMG] since 25th August 2020, claiming user since 22nd July 2013.

For the sake of convenience, these marks would be referred to, hereinafter, as 'the KHADI marks' and 'Charkha marks/logos'.

3. Case set out in the plaint

3.1. The KHADI trademarks, registered in the plaintiff's favour, it is submitted, are source identifiers. The 'Charkha logos' ([IMG] and [IMG]) are also harbingers of Gandhian thoughts and ideologies which are stated to guide the plaintiff's activities. It is further asserted that KHADI has been held to a well known trade mark in various WIPO proceedings, though the plaint does not refer to any judicial order passed in this country to the said effect. The plaintiff is also the proprietor of the domain name khadiindia.gov.in and operates the websites www.kviconline.gov.in and www.ekhadiindia.com, which catalogue a variety of products of the plaintiff. The plaintiff also claims to have extensive social media presence. It also operates a mobile application by the name 'Khadi India'. By dint of continuous and uninterrupted adoption and use, asserts the plaint, the trade mark KHADI has become indelibly associated, in the minds of the consuming public, with the plaintiff.

3.2. The plaintiff claims to promote the KHADI brand and products bearing the KHADI mark through institutions certified by it. According to the plaint, the right to use the KHADI mark for textile products requires the person or organization to be enlisted as an authorized user of the KHADI trade marks, for which it has to apply for recognition through the Khadi Institutions Registration and Certification Sewa (KIRCS).

3.3. Vide Notification dated 19th July 2013, the plaintiff, in exercise of the power conferred on it by Section 27¹ [27. Power to make regulations.--(1) The Commission may, with the previous sanction of the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations, not inconsistent with this Act and the rules made thereunder, for enabling it to discharge its functions under this Act. (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such regulations may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:- (a) the terms and conditions of appointment and service and the scales of pay of officers and servants of the Commission, other than the Chief Executive Officer] and the Financial Adviser to the Commiss