Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Substituting ‘K’ with ‘M’ to form ‘GOLD FLAME’ from ‘GOLD FLAKE’ does not make the competing Marks dissimilar. A consumer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection or not well-versed in English would be unable to distinguish between the competing products.”
“Hermes’ long-standing reputation and consistent use of the Subject Marks across jurisdictions establishes a continuous and significant commercial presence.”
Defendant 2 was operating a YouTube Channel that used photographs and videos of Anjana Om Kashyap in a manner portraying that the channel was hers. The channel also posted certain deepfake videos including fake news clippings of the plaintiff.
Cricfy and other defendants are mobile applications that allow users to illegally stream copyrighted content available on JioStar, for free or minimal subscription.
“While it is open to exaggerate the claims relating to the goods or services and embellish their virtues or benefits, it is not open to denigrate or disparage the goods of the others as a class in its entirety.”
“WIPRO has been expanding into various sectors since the 1980s and has obtained various registrations for the ‘WIPRO’ mark in various classes with the earliest registration in the year 1991.”
“The test reports and regulatory clearances from FSSAI and BIS prima facie establish compliance with standards for safety and quality of the Indospirit Beverages’ Product ‘BROCODE’.”
“The depiction of the Akkineni Nagarjuna in settings that are misleading, derogatory and inappropriate will inevitably have the effect of diluting the goodwill and reputation associated with him.”
“The identity in the defendant’s marks is so close to Mankind’s trade marks that the two are indistinguishable. The infringing activities of the defendant is likely to cause confusion in the course of trade of Mankind leading to erosion of consumers’ trust.”
“When the identity of a famous personality is used without their consent or authorization, it may not only lead to commercial detriment to the concerned individual but also impact their right to live with dignity.”
In July 2025, Tata Sons (P) Ltd. discovered Defendant 1’s website, ‘https://www.tatapayment.net/’ offering digital payment services while wholly incorporating trade marks, ‘TATA’, ‘TATA PAYMENTS’.
“Likelihood of confusion is not to be easily presumed. The nature of the goods and the class of their purchasers has to be borne in mind.”
“The Plaintiff’s registered marks are Device Marks and not Word Marks. Hence, no infringement can be brought merely because of the use of the word ‘YATRA’ by the Defendant as ‘YATRA’ is a generic and a descriptive word.”
A prima facie case has been made out by Hero Motocorp for grant of an ex-parte ad-interim injunction. The balance of convenience is also in favour of Hero Motocorp and against the defendants.
There is no absolute bar on the Trial Court to consider the subsequent developments and condone the delay if justifiable grounds are made out in the Application for condonation of delay.