Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TEJAS KARIA
Emami Limited – Appellant
Versus
Dabur India Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
TEJAS KARIA, J.
I.A. No. 14557/2023 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1&2 CPC)
1. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”).
2. Vide Order dated 09.08.2023, the Defendant was restrained from selling its product ‘Cool King Thanda Tael’ (“Defendant’s Product”), in
’ (“Impugned Trade Dress”) or any other deceptively similar Trade Dress.3. The Defendant preferred an appeal against the Order dated 09.08.2023. The Division Bench vide Order dated 21.08.2023 passed in FAO (OS)(COMM) 171/2023 set aside the Order dated 09.08.2023 on the limited ground that in the circumstances of the present case, the Defendant ought to have been given an opportunity to file its Reply to the present Application before adjudicating on the aspect of interim stay.
4. As recorded in Order dated 29.02.2024, the Plaintiff has confined its submissions on aspect of passing off in this Application subject to reserving the right of the Plaintiff for other reliefs in the Suit.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF:
5. The learned Senior Counsel for the Plaintiff made the following submissions:
5.1 The Plaintiff, established
Establishing trademark passing off requires proof of goodwill, misrepresentation, and likelihood of damage, emphasizing overall impression over minor differences.
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.
The court established that the rights of the prior user of a trademark are superior to those of a subsequent user, emphasizing the elements of goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage in passing off c....
if there is no infirmity found in the order of the Trial Court, injunction against encashment of bank guarantee and letter of credit should not be granted except where fraud or irretrievable damage i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the adoption of a similar trade dress, including color scheme, with a dishonest intention to infringe a well-known trademark and pass off good....
The court ruled that deceptive similarity between competing marks creates a likelihood of consumer confusion and supports injunction against the infringing party.
The court upheld that lack of deceptive similarity precludes claims of trademark infringement and passing off, necessitating proof of goodwill and likelihood of confusion.
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
