The court held that the similarity of marks 'SONA' and 'SONAE' is likely to cause confusion, establishing grounds for injunction against the latter's use.

JUDGMENT

Navin Chawla, J.

I.A. No.8936/2022 (Under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908) & I.A. No.9798/2022 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908)

1. By way of the present common order, this Court shall dispose of the above two applications; one filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, `CPC') and the other filed by the defendant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC.

2. The plaintiff has filed the above suit praying for inter-alia a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using the trade mark/trade name/logo `SONAE' or any other deceptively-similar mark to that of the plaintiff `SONA' or its derivatives/formatives either as a trade mark/trade name/logo/trading style, domain name or in relation to any goods or services so as to result in an infringement of the plaintiff's registered trade marks and statutory rights.

Factual Background

3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff is a part of the `SONA Group', which was founded in the year 1984. In the year 2008, the `SONA Group' acquired a company by the name of ThyssenKrupp AG's Forging Business and became a prominent manufacturer of precision-forged gears in the world and renamed the company to `Sona BLW Precision Forgings Ltd.' in the year 2013.

3.1. In July 2019, the plaintiff acquired a company by the name of `Comstar Automotive Technologies Private Limited' (hereinafter referred to as `Comstar'). The scheme of amalgamation was sanctioned by the learned National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh vide the order dated 07.01.2022 passed in CP(CAA) No. 3/Chd/Hry/2021 titled Comstar Automotive Technologies Private Limited with Sona BLW Precision Forgings Limited, with the appointed date of the scheme of amalgamation as 05.07.2019. The said company was engaged in the business of manufacturing a range of products consisting of electric motors, controllers, and starters for use in all passengers and commercial vehicles, including Electric Vehicles (in short, `EV').

3.2. The plaintiff asserts that it is one of the market leaders, including in the EV segment globally, having its manufacturing units in India, the USA, Mexico, China and Hong Kong, and has created a niche in the EV segment globally. The plaintiff further asserts that it has a research and development centre in Chennai.

3.3. The plaintiff states that there are other entities which are a part of the `SONA Group' having `Sona' in their name, such as Sona Autocomp Holding Private Limited, Sona Skill Development Centre Limited and Sona Management Services Ltd.

3.4. The plaintiff asserts that the `SONA Group' of companies has two divisions related to automotive industries in both EV and non-EV segments. As far as its Electrical/EV Division is concerned, the business of the plaintiff is housed under an erstwhile wholly-owned subsidiary, namely Comstar, which later merged with the plaintiff, and under this division, the plaintiff is engaged in the manufacture and assembly of electric motors, controllers, alternators and starter kits forming part of automobiles in domestic as well as international markets.

3.5. The plaintiff contends that it has a major presence in the USA, Mexico, Hong Kong, China and India. It claims to have enjoyed a global market share of more than 6% in precision-forged gears for differential gears and a market share of 4.6% in starter motors and controllers.

3.6. The plaintiff asserts that it also produces BSG solutions for hybrid cars, traction motors for EV applications, starter motors, alternatives, transmission gears, axle stubs, differential assemblies for electric and comb