Back
MINI PUSHKARNA
New Balance Athletics INC. – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mini Pushkarna, J.
1. The present suit is filed seeking permanent injunction restraining trademark infringement, passing off of trademark, acts of unfair competition, seeking damages/rendition of accounts, freezing assets, delivery up and other reliefs. The same is sought on the ground that there are unknown defendants who are making sale of counterfeiting products, inter alia using and thereby infringing plaintiff’s registered trademarks, i.e. 
and “NEW BALANCE”.
2. The case, as canvassed by the plaintiff, is as follows:
2.1 The plaintiff first used the term ‘NEW BALANCE’ as part of its corporate name in the year 1906 and as a trademark for its retail services in 1951 in United States of America. Further, the plaintiff has several subsidiary companies all across the world, which use the term ‘NEW BALANCE’ as the corporate name, the Indian subsidiary being ‘New Balance IT Services India Private Limited’. Moreover, the combination of letters ‘NB’ in one form or another, is being used since the 1970s and the device marks were first used as trademarks on footwear in the year 1987 across the world. 2.2 The plaintiff under their marks sells products in over 120 countries, along w
Trademark infringement and passing off established due to defendants' sale of counterfeit products, leading to a decree in favor of the plaintiff.
Trademark infringement and passing off can be established based on the use of deceptively similar marks and failure to comply with interim injunction orders.
The court established that the unauthorized use of identical trademarks constitutes infringement and passing off, justifying a permanent injunction and awarding damages to the rightful trademark owne....
In passing off, cumulative circumstantial evidence establishing misrepresentation likelihood suffices on preponderance of probabilities, without strict proof of counterfeiting; good faith commercial ....
The court established that the sale of counterfeit medical devices constitutes a grave offense endangering public health, warranting both compensatory and exemplary damages.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademarks, the likelihood of confusion or deception arising from the similarity of marks, and the prima facie case of infringeme....
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
