IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Fybros Electric Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Vasu Dev Gupta Trading As Vasu Electronics & Anr. – Respondents
C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 13 of 2021 & I.A. 13372 of 2021
Decided On : 25-05-2023
Trade Marks - NJBROS - Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 - [57] - The judgment discusses the application of Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in a case involving the marks [IMG] and NJBROS. The court analyzes the likelihood of confusion, priority of registration and use, and the bona fide adoption of the mark NJBROS. The judgment concludes that the impugned mark NJBROS is liable to be removed from the register of trademarks under Section 57(2) read with Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a registered proprietor of the mark [IMG], claimed user since 2010-11 and sought removal of the mark NJBROS registered in favor of the respondent. The petitioner alleged likelihood of confusion and priority of registration and use over the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had established user of the mark [IMG] since 2010-11 and had priority of registration and use over the respondent. The court also found that the impugned mark NJBROS was phonetically similar to the petitioner's mark and there existed a likelihood of confusion in the public if both marks were allowed to co-exist. The court held that the impugned mark NJBROS was liable to be removed from the register of trademarks under Section 57(2) read with Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act.
Issues: The issues involved in the case included the likelihood of confusion, priority of registration and use, and the bona fide adoption of the mark NJBROS.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the Pianotist test for phonetic similarity and held that the impugned mark NJBROS was liable to be removed from the register of trademarks under Section 57(2) read with Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act due to the likelihood of confusion and the petitioner's priority of registration and use.
Final Decision: The petition succeeded, and the impugned mark NJBROS was directed to be removed from the register of trademarks.
ORDER (Oral)
1. This is a petition under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 ("the Act", hereinafter). The petitioner is the registered proprietor of the following marks:
| S. No. | TRADE MARK/LABEL | DATE OF FILING AND USER CLAIM | APP. NO. | CLASS | STATUS |
| 1. | [IMG] | 10th December 2008 Proposed to be used | 1762041 | 09 | Registered |
| 2. | [IMG] | 20th March 2015 User claim: 06.11.2008 | 2927191 | 09 | Registered |
| 3. | [IMG] | 26th November 2008 Proposed to be used | 1758032 | 09 | Registered |
| 4. | [IMG] | 26th November 2008 | 1758036 Proposed to be used | 09 | Registered |
| 5. | [IMG] | 26th November 2008 | 1758033 Proposed to be used | 11 | Registered |
| 6. | [IMG] | 26th November 2008 | 1758037 Proposed to be used | 11 | Registered |
| 7. | [IMG] | 10th December 2008 | 1762045 Proposed to be used | 11 | Registered |
| 8. | [IMG] | 20th March 2015 | 2927192 6th November 2008 | 11 | Registered |
2. The mark [IMG] is, therefore, registered in favour of the petitioner in, inter alia,
(i) Class 9 covering "Electrical Accessories And Fittings, Switches, Switch Gears, Wire And Cables Scientific, Nautical, Surveying, Electric, Photographic, Cinematographic, Optical, Weighing, Measuring, Signaling, Checking (Supervision), Life Saving And Teaching Apparatus And Instruments; Apparatus For Recording, Transmission Or Reproduction Of Sound Or Images; Magnetic Data Carriers, Recording Discs; Automatic Vending Machines And Mechanisms For Coin-Operated Apparatus; Cash Registers, Calculating Machines, Data Processing Equipment - And Computers; Fire Extinguishing Apparatus", with effect from 10th December 2008 and
(ii) Class 11, covering "Apparatus For Lighting, Heating, Steam, Generating, Cooking, Refrigrating, Drying Ventilating, Water Supply And Sanitary Purpose", also with effect from 10th December 2008.
3. The petitioner avers that the petitioner has been using the mark in relation [IMG]/to a wide range of electrical goods including electrical accessories and fittings, electrical switches, main switches and fuse units, wires and cables and other allied and cognate goods since 2008. It is claimed that, by dint of continuous user, the mark [IMG] has built up considerable reputation and is, by now, a source identifier, identifying the goods of the petitioner.
4. To vouchsafe its credibility and reach in the market, the petitioner has provided particulars of its sales figures from the years 2011-12 to 2019-20. During the year 2019-20, the sales figures of the petitioner are to the tune of Rs.252 crores.
5. The petitioner is aggrieved by the registration of the mark NJBROS as a word mark in favour of the respondent in Class 11 w.e.f 8th March 2019, covering "Apparatus For Lighting, Heating, Steam Generating, Cooking, Refrigerating, Drying, Ventilating Purposes; LED & Decorative Lights, LED Bulb, CFL Lights, Cooling Appliances & Installations, Fan, Cooler, Electric Kettle, Ice Machines, & Apparatus, Cooking Utensils (Electric); Refrigerator, Freezer, Cookers Incorporating Grills, Ovens, Microwave Ovens, Air Conditioning And Water Purifying Installations And Apparatus, R.O. Systems. Heater, Water Heaters, Water Immersion Heaters, Geyser, Coffee Brewers (Electric), Household Air Cleaners, Toaster, Electric Waffle Irons, Hearing Elements Included In Class 11".
6. The petitioner uses its [IMG] mark for electrical goods including electrical accessories and fittings, electrical switches, main switches and fuse units, wires, cables and other allied goods whereas Respondent 1 uses the NJBROS mark for manufacturing, marketing and selling of electronics and home appliances. On that, there is no dispute.
7. Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned mark NJBROS is liable to be removed from the register of trade marks under Section 57(2)1[57. Power to cancel or vary registration and to rectify the register. -
*****
(2) Any person aggrieved by the absence or omission from the register of any entry, or by any entry made in the register without sufficient cause, or by any entry wrongly remaining on the register, or by any error or defect i
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 57(2) read with Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 to remove the impugned mark NJBROS from the register of tr....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 11(1)(b) of the Trademarks Act to determine the likelihood of confusion based on phonetic similarity and the priority....
The likelihood of confusion between competing marks arises from both the similarity of the marks and the nature of the goods, permitting trademark opposition to succeed under Section 11.
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 for a trade mark to be ineligible for registration under Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, there must be a cumulative satisfaction o....
The use of a deceptively similar mark in the pharmaceutical industry can lead to confusion, warranting injunction to protect the registered trademark.
The court held that similar trademarks operating in different markets do not always lead to confusion, emphasizing the need to prove distinctiveness and absence of confusion under the Trade Marks Act....
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.