IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C.HARI SHANKAR, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
Chacha Saree Bazar Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Chacha Cloth House – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellants claim infringement of trademark. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. respondent argues 'chacha' is generic. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. commercial court's initial ruling on trademark. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. appellants dispute generics ruling. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. respondent defends 'chacha' as common. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. court supports injunction principle. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. court establishes prima facie infringement. (Para 49 , 50 , 51) |
| 8. injunction to follow due to infringement. (Para 72 , 73 , 74) |
JUDGMENT :
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
The lis
1. The appellant is the registered proprietor of the marks CHACHA SAREE BAZAR PVT LTD and CHACHE DI HATTI, both as word and device marks, under Section 23 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, ["the Act” hereinafter] for textiles, clothing and garments such as sarees, lehengas, and like goods. The respondent, without any registration, is using the mark CHACHA CLOTH HOUSE for trading in identical goods. The appellant sued the respondent alleging infringement of its registered trade marks. The suit is pending. An application, by the appellant under Order XXXIX of the CPC, [Code of Civil Procedure, 1908] for interim injunction stan









Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah
Midas Hygiene Industries (P) Ltd v. Sudhir Bhatia
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satyadeo Gupta
Satyam Infoway Ltd v Siffynet Solutions (P) Ltd
South India Beverages Pvt Ltd v. General Mills Marketing Inc
Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma v. Navratna Pharmaceuticals Laboratories
Wander Ltd v. Antox India P Ltd
Distinctiveness in trademark law must be assessed concerning the goods or services; common terms can acquire distinctiveness based on usage, thus allowing for a prima facie case of infringement.
Trademarks that are descriptive, like 'Pe' in 'PhonePe', cannot claim exclusivity; parties may not dissect marks but can analyze dominant features for likelihood of confusion.
The court upheld the plaintiff's rights as the prior user and registered owner of the trademark, granting an injunction against the defendant's use of a similar mark due to the likelihood of consumer....
The use of a registered trade mark as part of a trade name or business concern is an infringement under Section 29(5) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
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.