Back
SANJEEV NARULA
Jaquar Company Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Villeroy Boch Ag – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)
I.A. 18241/2022 (for grant of interim injunction)
Trademark tussle: Artize v. Artis - who owns the artistic touch?
1. This suit relates to the clash between sanitary ware giants over their brand names. The Plaintiff, M/s Jaquar & Company Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter, "Jaquar"] and the Defendants, Villeroy & Boch AG and Villeroy & Boch Sales India Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter collectively, "Villeroy"] are two well- established brands in the business of sanitary ware and bathroom fitting products. They are at loggerheads over the words "ARTIZE" used by Jaquar, and "ARTIS" used by Villeroy, both derivatives of the word "ART". Jaquar asserts that they coined and adopted the fanciful trademark "ARTIZE" in 2008 and since then, have been continuously and uninterruptedly using the same for their luxury segment of sanitary ware. Villeroy, on the other hand, contests Jaquar's proprietary claims, contending that "ARTIS" is a Latin term which means art, and thus, "ARTIZE" is nothing but a derivative of "ARTIS" and is purely descriptive, whereon no monopoly can be claimed. Furthermore, they argue that "ARTIS" is a sub- brand/range/collection used in conjunction with their w
The main legal point established is the protection of inherently distinctive trademarks and the likelihood of confusion as a basis for granting injunctive relief.
The court affirmed the registered trademark holder's rights against similar marks and clarified standards for proving prior use and confusion under trademark law.
Generic and descriptive terms in trademarks cannot be exclusively claimed, and likelihood of confusion must be assessed holistically from the average consumer's perspective.
Court held that common descriptive terms in trademarks cannot be claimed exclusively and must be assessed as a whole, dismissing claims of deceptive similarity.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the dissimilarity of goods, the plaintiff's inaction amounting to acquiescence, and the lack of evidence to establish the plaintiff's reput....
The principle of prior user of a trademark prevails over subsequent registrations, especially when confusion or association is likely between goods and services of similar trade sectors.
The court held that registration of trademarks does not grant exclusive rights over a common or partially generic term, emphasizing the need for distinctiveness to prevent confusion.
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
