JUDGMENT

SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral):

1. The Plaintiff, owner of the trademark “GHADI” and its formative variants, seeks a permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from infringement and passing off identical goods as that of the Plaintiff’s through their trademark “ ” [“Impugned Trademark”]. Both parties are engaged in an identical business of manufacture and sale of detergents, soaps and other products. Despite being served with summons in the suit and being restrained by an interim order, the Defendant has failed to contest the proceedings. Consequently, their defence has been closed, leading to ex-parte proceedings. This matter is now before the Court for final disposal.

PLAINTIFF’S CASE

2. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of washing soap, detergent powder, detergent cake, shampoo, hair oil, toothpaste, moisturizer, shaving cream, liquid hand wash, floor cleaner, liquid detergent, toilet cleaner and other allied and cognate goods.

3. The Plaintiff (through its predecessor) honestly conceived and adopted the device/label of “GHARI”/ “GHADI”/ “WATCH”/ “CLOCK” in the year 1955 in relation to soap and the wordmark “GHARI”/ “GHADI” in 1975 [collectively, “GHADI Trademarks”] in relation to washing soap, detergent powder, detergent cake, shampoo etc.

4. The Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of over 70 GHADI Trademarks in multiple classes, with approximately 16 registrations in Class 3 alone. They are also the original author of artistic works/ labels “ ”, “ ”, “ ”, “ ”, “ ”, “ ”, “ ”, which are registered under Nos. A-60520/2002, A- 60521/2002, A-61215/2002, A-61216/2002, A-67662/2004, A-80077/2007 and A-80078/2007, respectively.

5. Since the commencement of its business operations, the Plaintiff has continuously and uninterruptedly used the GHADI Trademarks and artwork in respect of its products. For promotion of its products, the Plaintiff has developed a website “www.gharidetergent.com” which contains extensive information about the Plaintiff’s products and business. Additionally, since 1993, the Plaintiff has undertaken substantial expenses for advertisement and promotions amounting to Rs. 847028.47 lakhs for the financial year 2020-21. To establish their reputation and goodwill, the Plaintiff has provided details of their sales volume between the years 1993-2021, with the turnover for the financial year 2020-21 being Rs. 5953 lakhs.

6. On account of their uninterrupted use and immense goodwill acquired, the Plaintiff’s “ ” trademark was declared to be a well-known trademark by the Trade Mark Office through publication in Trade Marks Journal No. 1942 dated 24th February, 2020.

DEFENDANT’S IMPUGNED ACTIVITIES

7. In February, 2023, Plaintiff discovered application bearing No.

5554653 in class 3 for the registration of the trademark “ ” on a ‘proposed to be used’ basis, which was advertised in the Trade Marks Journal on 23rd January, 2023. The said application is in respect of detergent powder and detergent cake, liquid toilet cleaner, cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations and soaps [“Impugned Goods”]. Immediately upon said discovery, on 14th February, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a notice of opposition against the said application.

8. Upon a subsequent search, the Plaintiff also found the wordmark “AGRAGHADIYAL” registered in favour of the Defendant under No. 4398088 in class 3 in respect of the Impugned Goods on a ‘proposed to be used’ basis. The Plaintiff, being aggrieved by the aforesaid registration, filed a cancellation petition being C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 142/2023 which was dismissed vide Order dated 03rd May, 2023. An appeal against the aforesaid dismissal is currently pending before the Division Bench. Consequently, Plaintiff is not pursuing the present suit against Defendant’s wordmark “AGRAGHADIYAL”, and is only seeking to restrain the adoption and proposed use of the label/device mark “ ” .

9. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant has copied the essential feature and