Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Freecia Professional is a cosmetic company selling facial kits under the house mark ‘PROADS’ similar to the plaintiff’s O 3+ range.
“This Court came to a prima facie finding of overall deceptive similarity in the rival marks and that the impugned marks and the artwork adopted by the defendant is deceptively and confusingly similar to that of the Asian Paint Ltd.’s mark.”
“The proprietary right of the plaintiff in the registered trade mark ‘GOLD FLAKE’ was prima facie demonstrated through the registrations and uninterrupted use since 1905, and its reputation and goodwill were evident from the sales turnover and the leading presence in the cigarette manufacturing industry.”
“The registration of the plaintiff’s mark in the year 1972, prima facie, granted an exclusive right to the plaintiff to use it, which was infringed when the defendants used the impugned mark METRO FOOTWEAR.”
“The use of blue colour in the packaging of hair oils is common in the trade and cannot be claimed exclusively by any single manufacturer.”
The defendants were operating an 11-room hotel by the name of ‘Bukhara Inn’ and had refused to comply with the cease and desist notice sent by ITC Ltd.
“The distinctive features should be discussed in order to decide as to whether the two packets/trade dresses, viewed as a whole, would cause confusion in the mind of end consumers or not.”
“The power of rectification is exercisable only by the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction over the appropriate office of the Trade Marks Registry, wherein the entry relating to the impugned mark is made.”
“The Court Receiver was directed to visit and search all premises of the defendants, forcibly breaking open locks if necessary and taking police assistance where required to seize and seal all offending goods.”
“The dominant feature of the marks WOW MOMO and WOW BURGER is clearly the prefix ‘WOW’, as the suffix in each mark merely refers to the food item in respect of which the mark is being used. The dominant feature of the two marks, i.e. WOW, is identical.”
“The use of trade name ‘ALCHEM’ on the defendant’s packaging material in addition to the generic names is likely to cause confusion in the mind of customers of average intelligence.”
Ravi Mohan Studios produced an additional typed-set showing that the attempted registration of the trade mark ‘BROCODE’ by Indo Bevs beverage company had been objected to and is pending consideration. Hence the Court issued interim relief.
“Since 2011, through campaigns like ‘You Can Be Anything’ and initiatives such as the Shero program and Fashionistas collections, Mattel has promoted inclusivity, diversity, and women’s empowerment. With a vibrant online presence, scholarly attention, and millions of fans worldwide, the trademark BARBIE has evolved into a multifaceted brand symbolizing imagination, aspiration, and inspiration for generations.”
“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.”
“The infraction of the rights of the appellant can take place in various shapes like dilution of its mark, initial interest confusion, and actual confusion.”
“The defendant has affixed the plaintiff’s trade mark HAVELI with another word i.e., ‘PUNJABI’ and the word ‘PUNJABI’ has been incorporated in such a small font, that it remains insignificant to the eyes of the viewers misleading the customers into believing that the defendant’s restaurant is associated with the plaintiff.”
The defendants were operating several websites and applications to trick the general public into believing that they were representatives/associates of Zepto and so as to scam them into paying for fake job opportunities with Zepto
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’.
The Defendants were operating several websites and applications to trick the general public into believing that they were associated with Premji Invest so as to scam them into illegal and fraudulent investments.
“The actions of defendant 1 are misleading unsuspecting customers, resulting in them sharing their confidential information and spending their hard-earned money on these infringing platforms. It is evident that defendant 1 are trying to create the impression that their websites, Social Media Groups, are associated with INDmoney”