The court established that phonetic similarity and likelihood of confusion between the plaintiff's and defendant's marks justified an interim injunction against the defendant's use of the marks.

% 01.04.2024 FACILITATIVE INDEX S.No. Content Para Nos. 1 The Issue 1 - 2 2 Facts and Rival Contentions 3 Initial submissions of Mr. Kapil Wadhwa for the plaintiff 4 Registrations held by the plaintiff and defendant 3.1 – 3.4 5 User of plaintiff’s marks 4.1 – 4.2 6 Reputation of plaintiff’s marks 5.1 – 5.3 7 Plaintiff’s trade dress 6 8 Defendant’s acts and alleged infringement and passing off 7.1 – 7.11 9 Submissions of Mr. Chander M. Lall in reply 10 Monopolization of “ART” prefix 8.1 – 8.3 11 No infringement action against registered mark – Section 28(3) 9.1 – 9.2 12 Re. passing off No bad faith adoption Applying the Pianotist test – surrounding circumstances and nature of consumers 12.1 – 12.4 15 ART is common to the trade – Section 17(2)(b) 13 16 Estoppel 14 17 No likelihood of confusion 15 18 Plea of infringement not maintainable – Section 124 16 19 No trade dress copying 17.1 – 17.2 20 Re. TIARA 18 21 Rejoinder by Mr. Wadhwa 22 Re. trade dress copying 19 23 Re. monopolization of “ART” and the common to the trade defence 20.1 – 20.8 24 Likelihood of confusion 21.1 – 21.2 25 Re. TIARA 22.1 – 22.2 23 Action for infringement lies against registered trade mark 23 24 Balance of convenience 24.1 – 24.2 25 Mr. Lall in surrejoinder 26 – 33 26 Analysis 27 Infringement 34.1 – 34.17 28 Relevance of validity of plaintiff’s trade mark registration – Section 29 vis-à-vis Section 28(1) 34.5.1 – 34.5.3 29 Can action for infringement lie against a registered trade mark? 34.10.1 – 34.10.18 30 The aspect of deceptive similarity 34.11.1 – 34.11.9 31 The “device mark-to-device mark” argument 34.11.3.1 – 34.11.3.4 32 Phonetic similarity 34.11.4.1 – 34.11.4.8 33 Re. the argument that TIARA is not used as a trade mark 34.11.8.1 – 34.11.8.5 34 Munday and Slazenger 34.15.1 – 34.15.7 35 Passing off 35.1 – 35.5 36 Challenge to validity of the plaintiff’s mark 36.1 – 36.4 37 The sequitur 37 38 The “ART monopolization” argument 38.1 – 38.6 39 Permissible copying 39.1 – 39.2 40 The plea of estoppel 40.1 – 40.3 40 The interlocutory troika 41.1 – 41.7 41 Conclusion 42 – 45 I.A. 18638/2023 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the CPC)

1. The plaintiff, Jaquar & Co Pvt Ltd claims that the use, by the defendant, Ashirvad Pipes Pvt Ltd, of the mark ARTISTRY, both as a word mark as well as in the form of the devices , and , infringes the plaintiff’s registered trade marks , , , , and ‘ARTIZE – BORN FROM ART’, and that the defendant’s mark ‘TIARA’ infringes the plaintiff’s registered trade marks ‘TIAARA’ and .

The use of the impugned marks by the defendant, it is further alleged, results in the defendant passing off its products as those of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff, therefore, seeks, by the present suit, an injunction against the defendant using the impugned marks, apart from delivery up, rendition of accounts, costs and damages.

An interim injunction, restraining the defendant from using the impugned marks pending disposal of the present suit, is sought in this application.

2. I have heard Mr. Kapil Wadhwa, learned Counsel for the plaintiff and Mr. Chander M. Lall, learned Senior Counsel for the defendant, at length on this application.

Facts and Rival Contentions Initial submissions by Mr. Kapil Wadhwa for the plaintiff

3. Registrations held by the plaintiff and defendant Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:01.04.2024 18:55:48

Signature Not Verified

3.1 The plaintiff is the proprietor of the following trade marks, registered under Section 23(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 :

S.

No .

Trademark Applicatio n No. Class Date of Application

1. 1736192 11 24.09.2008 2 2003072 11 03.08.2010 3 2165292 11 24.06.2011 4 4879936 35 25.02.2021 5 4879937 35 25.02.2021 6 4879938 11 25.02.2021 7 5250966 11 17.12.2021 8 3603569 11 01.08.2017 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:01.04.2024 18:55:48

Signature Not Verified

3.2 The defendant is also the proprietor of the following registered trade marks :

S.

No.

Trademark Date of Application User de