IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Khadi & Village Industries Commission - Appellant
Versus
Raman Gupta - Respondent
CS (COMM) 133 of 2022 & I.A. 3299 of 2022
Decided On : 26-07-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trademark ownership and registration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. allegation of trademark infringement by defendants. (Para 6) |
| 3. court's analysis on infringement and public interest. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. decision on injunction and damages. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. final decree and order of the court. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. The present suit has been filed seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, rendition of accounts, damages, delivery up, etc. The Plaintiff - Khadi & Village Industries Commission is a statutory body established by an Act of Parliament being `Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act of 1956'. The Plaintiff claims to be the registered proprietor of the mark `KHADI' and the variants of the same in several classes, in Hindi and English, both in artistic form, as also, in logo form, along with the `Charkha Logos'. The said marks are set out below:
i) `KHADI' (word)
ii) `
' (Device)
iii) `
' (Device)
iv) `
' (Charkha Logo)
v) `
' (Charkha Logo)
2. A perusal of the Plaint shows that the mark `KHADI' is a registered trademark of the Plaintiff, along with logos and various device marks thereof, as depicted hereinabove. The trademark `KHADI' is promoted by the Plaintiff through a statutory corporation, and in recent times, enormous emphasis has been given globally to promote `KHADI' products. The Plaintiff's `KHADI' trademarks are also registered in various other jurisdictions/regions, including but not limited to United Kingdom, China, Australia, USA, New Zealand, Bhutan, Mexico, etc.
3. The Plaintiff hosts its website under the domain name `www.kviconline.gov.in' which is registered since 1st July, 2010. The Plaintiffs have obtained further registrations for the domain names `www.Khadiindia.gov.in' which redirects to `https://www.kviconline.gov.in/khadimask/'. Recently, on 31st December, 2021, the Plaintiff has also unveiled `www.ekhadiindia.com' which sells over 50,000 products of the more than 500 varieties ranging from food products, grocery products, oils, to diyas, woollen products, cosmetics, etc. Moreover, during the recent pandemic, the Plaintiff has also manufactured and sold various medical products, such as hand wash, hand sanitizers, etc. which are also being used extensively by the consumers.
4. The Plaintiff also promotes its products branded as `KHADI' on several social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, etc. all of which enjoy a wide followership. A mobile application by the name of `KHADI INDIA' is also operated and made available on Google Play Store, by the Plaintiff and the same has been downloaded by more than 10,000 users. The said application helps customers, patrons, and members of trade in locating the nearest `KHADI INDIA' store. The Plaintiff also closely works with various Ministries in order to promote `KHADI' products and the `KHADI' Industry in India and abroad. The mark `KHADI' along with the `Charkha logo' is also licensed out to several third-parties and the `KHADI' products are sold on e-commerce platforms like `Amazon' and `Nykaa'.
5. As per the Plaint, the total exports value of the `KHADI' products sold by the Plaintiff for the year 2016 was more than Rs.140 crores, and the same for the year 2019-20 is stated to be Rs.238 crores. For the financial year 2021, it is pleaded that the turnover of the Plaintiff is Rs.95,000/- crores. The evidence on record shows that due to various reasons including registrations, large varieties of goods and services, and a sales turnover of Rs.95,000/- crores, the mark `KHADI' along with the `Charkha logo' have become well-known and have, in fact, been protected in various proceedings such as `Khadi Village and Industries Commission v. Roopika Rastogi & Anr., CS (COMM) 146/2021 and `Khadi and Village Industries Commission v. M/s. JBMR Enterprises, CS (COMM) 284/2021).
6. The grievance of the P






![]() | |||||
![]() | |||||
![]() |
Unauthorized use of a registered trademark, particularly in health-related products, constitutes infringement and can endanger public safety, warranting permanent injunction and damages.
Important Point :The use of a trademark that is phonetically and visually similar to a registered trademark can lead to confusion, constituting infringement, especially when dishonest conduct is evid....
Registered trademarks can acquire protective rights against infringement even if they are descriptive when they establish secondary meaning associated with the product.
Trademark infringement occurs when a registered mark's rights surpass an unregistered mark's claims, especially when confusion is likely.
The court established that a composite trade mark must be assessed as a whole for registration, not in parts, and that refusal based on descriptiveness must consider the entirety of the mark.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of registered trademarks and the grant of interim injunctions to prevent trademark infringement and potential harm to consumers.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the infringement of a registered trademark under the Trademarks Act, 1999, and the entitlement to a permanent injunction and damages for the vio....
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.