Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J.
Kent Cables Private Limited & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Kent Ro Systems Limited & Ors. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 596 of 2022 & I.A. 16118 of 2022 & CS(COMM) 613 of 2022 & I.A. 14317 of 2022
Decided On : 30-05-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical trademark registration and business operations (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. trademark adoption and expansion by kent ro (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. contentions regarding infringement based on prior use (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. evidence supporting claims of prior user by kent cables (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. argument rejection relating to overlapping trade channels (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. parameters for proving infringement under section 29(2) (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. reputation and prior user rights consideration in passing off (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. court's analysis focus on fans as contested goods (Para 34 , 35) |
| 9. legal frameworks referencing relevance of sections 29 and 34 (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 10. discussion of passing off actions based on goodwill (Para 39 , 40) |
| 11. recognition of established reputation affecting user rights (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 12. overall impact of consumer confusion on reputation (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
| 13. evaluation of passing off claim in favor of prior user (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 14. final conclusions and injunctions granted by the court (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 15. broad ruling on trademark issues despite pending registrations (Para 63 , 64 , 65) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J.
I.A. 13851/2022 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, by Plaintiffs) in CS(COMM) 596/2022
I.A. 14316/2022 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, by Plaintiffs) in CS(COMM) 613/2022
1. CS(COMM) 596/2022 has been filed by Kent Cables Pvt. Ltd. & Others seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants and all others acting on their behalf from infringing Plaintiffs' registered trademark `KENT' on the products or as part of the corporate name and/or any other trademark deceptively similar thereto in relation to same or similar electronic or electrical goods as well as from passing off by using the trademark `KENT' in relation to electronic/electrical goods including, but not limited to Fans, lighting products, wires and cables etc., amongst other reliefs.
2. CS(COMM) 613/2022 has been filed by Kent RO Systems Ltd. & Others seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants and all others acting on their behalf from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any electric appliances including but not limited to iron water heaters, all types of fans etc. under the trademark KENT or any other mark including device marks [IMG] and [IMG], which may be identical or deceptively similar to Plaintiffs' registered trademark KENT amounting to infringement as also passing off, amongst other reliefs.
3. On account of the simililtude of facts and the issues involved in the two suits, the present applications are being decided by a common judgment. For the ease of reference, Plaintiffs in CS(COMM) 596/2022 are referred to as `Kent Cables' and Plaintiffs in CS(COMM) 613/2022 are referred to as `Kent RO' hereinafter. Narrative of facts to the extent they are different in the two suits will be separately mentioned.
BACKGROUND FACTS PERTAINING TO KENT CABLES IN CS(COMM) 596/2022
4. Trademark KENT was adopted by Plaintiff No. 2 in the year 1984 and Kent Cables has been carrying on business in various electronic and electrical goods, expanding its business from time-to- time and diversifying the business activities. The first registration of KENT in Class 09 dates back to 08.09.1986. Trademark KENT has acquired a valuable goodwill and reputation on account of colossal sales and immense publicity on account of its user dating back to 07.04.1984, which is reflected from the statement of sales and advertisement expenditure, details of which have been furnished in the plaint. Sales turnover for the year 2020-21 alone by Kent Cables Private Limited is to the tune of Rs. 5,40,05,625/- and with respect to Kent Industries is Rs. 212,81,72,708/-.
5. In addition to common law rights over the trademark KENT and its variants, Kent Cables is also the re
The court found that despite phonetic similarity, the distinctiveness of trade marks and differences in intended consumer bases negate the likelihood of confusion and passing off.
Trademark infringement occurs when a registered mark's rights surpass an unregistered mark's claims, especially when confusion is likely.
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.
In a passing off action, a plaintiff cannot obtain an injunction against a registered trademark proprietor whose adoption and registration of the mark predates the plaintiff's user, especially when t....
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
