{"id":281807,"date":"2023-01-17T15:00:31","date_gmt":"2023-01-17T09:30:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=281807"},"modified":"2023-01-20T11:31:37","modified_gmt":"2023-01-20T06:01:37","slug":"subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway’s plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food’s mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court<\/span>: In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark “SUBWAY”<\/i> against the mark “SUBERB”<\/span>, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed the application for injunction and held that after the modifications undertaken by Infinity Food in respect of décor, layout, wall hanging, menu cards and uniforms of the staff and its outlets, the appearance of Infinity Food's red and white “SUBERB”<\/i> mark could not be said to be deceptively similar to Subway's device mark, “SUBWAY”<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

The plaintiff (Subway) was a Company incorporated in the U.S., which operated a well-known global chain of restaurants under the name “SUBWAY”<\/i> and the plaintiff was the proprietor in India of registration not only of the “SUBWAY”<\/i> word and device marks, but also of “SUBWAY CLUB”<\/i> and “VEGGIE DELITE”<\/span>, being the names allotted by the plaintiff to its club sandwich and vegetable sandwich, respectively.<\/p>\n

Defendant 1 (Infinity Food) was a partnership firm of which Defendants 3 and 4 were partners. Defendants 3 and 4 were licensees of the plaintiff, to whom the plaintiff had granted the right to franchise the plaintiff's outlets and since 2019, they had been serving and distributing products of the plaintiff through the outlets owned by them.<\/p>\n

Submissions on behalf of the Plaintiff<\/p>\n

Subway alleged that the following acts of Infinity Food infringed Subway's intellectual property rights:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    the use of the brand name and logo “SUBWAY” under which the two restaurants run by Infinity Food operate, with an identical yellow and green colour scheme;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    the use of the brands “VEGGIE DELICIOUS”<\/i> and “SUB ON A CLUB”<\/i> which were deceptively similar to Subway's registered “VEGGIE DELITE”<\/i> and “SUBWAY CLUB”<\/i> marks;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    usage of identical, or similar, signage, outlet décor, menu cards, paper napkins and staff uniforms;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    use of photographs and wall art, in their outlets, which were similar to the photographs and wall art in Subway's outlets;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    use of food preparation procedures, techniques, service ingredients, formulae, recipes, ingredients, and placement of the service counters in the restaurants identical to that seen in Subway's outlets; and<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  6. \n

    verbatim reproduction, on Infinity Food's website, of the recitals in Subway’s website, with similar layout of headings, etc.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Submissions on behalf of the Defendants<\/p>\n

    Infinity Food offered to (a) make change in the colour combination used in the signage outside their restaurants to a combination of purple, pink, white or red; (b) make change in the colour of their logo to a combination of one or more of the colours purple, pink, white or red; (c) not to use yellow or green either in the signage or logo; (d) pull down their website which copied the text found on Subway's website and (e) change the names of their sandwiches “VEGGIE DELICIOUS”<\/i> and “SUB ON A CLUB”<\/i> to “VEG LOADED REGULAR”<\/i> and “TORTA CLUB”<\/i>.<\/p>\n

    Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

    The Court noted that Subway was not satisfied with the changes that Infinity Food made as the marks “SUBWAY”<\/i> and “SUBERB”<\/i> were deceptively similar to each other as word marks and even if the colour scheme of the said marks was changed, the marks would continue to remain deceptively similar. The Court further noted that Infinity Food contended that Subway could not claim exclusivity in the initial “SUB”<\/i> part of the “SUBWAY”<\/i> mark as “SUB”<\/i> was generic with respect to the products in relation to which it was used.<\/p>\n

    The issue for consideration before this Court was “whether after th<\/i>e modifications that Infinity Food had undertaken, it could still be said to be infringing Subway's registered trade mark, or passing off their goods and services as those of Subway's, so as to entitle Subway to an injunction?”<\/span>.<\/p>\n

    The Court noted that under Section 29<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/a> (Act), infringement could only be of registered trade marks and the marks of which Subway had subsisting registrations, which were entitled to protection under Section 28 of the Act were: the word mark “SUBWAY”<\/i> and the device mark “SUBWAY”<\/i>. Subway had no other registered trade mark, to which it was entitled to protection against infringement from this Court. The Court further noted that Section 17(2) of the Act did not permit dissection of a trade mark and claiming of exclusivity in respect of part of the mark (anti-dissection rule) or claiming of infringement in respect of any matter which was common to the trade or otherwise of a non-distinctive character (publici juris<\/i>).<\/p>\n

    The Court opined that Infinity Food's mark “SUBERB”<\/i> could not be said to infringe any of Subway's word mark or device mark as “SUBERB”<\/i> was not phonetically similar to “SUBWAY”<\/i> though both were words of two syllables. The first syllable “SUB”<\/i> was common and “SUB”<\/span>, when used in the context of sandwiches, it was well known that it was an abbreviation for “Submarine”, which represented a well-known variety of long-bodied sandwiches, generally 6 or 9 inches in length. “SUB”<\/i> was therefore, publici juris<\/i> when used in context of such eateries and thus, no exclusivity could be claimed by Subway over the first part of its registered “SUBWAY”<\/i> mark, that is, “SUB”<\/span>. Moreover, once the “SUB”<\/i> part of the “SUBWAY”<\/i> mark was out of the way, there was quite obviously no similarity at all between “WAY”<\/i> and “ERB”<\/span>.<\/p>\n

    The Court relied on J.R. Kapoor<\/i> v. Micronix India<\/i>, 1994 Supp (3) SCC 215<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court held that no exclusivity could be claimed over the prefix “Micro”<\/i> and that, as the suffixes “Nix”<\/i> and “Tel”<\/i> were dissimilar phonetically and otherwise, no infringement could be alleged. The Court also relied on Schering Corporation<\/i> v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd<\/i>, (2009) SCC OnLine Del 3886<\/a>, wherein the Division Bench of this Court held that “Temokem”<\/i> not to be deceptively similar to “Temoget”<\/i> when used for pharmaceutical preparations containing Temozolamide.<\/p>\n

    The Court held that after the modifications undertaken by Infinity Food, the appearance of Infinity Food's red and white “SUBERB”<\/i> mark could not be said to be deceptively similar to Subway's device mark. Further, the modifications in respect of the two marks “VEG LOADED REGULAR”<\/i> and “TORTA CLUB” would<\/i> rest any allegation of infringement as the words “CLUB”<\/i> and “VEG”<\/i> were publici juris<\/i>.<\/p>\n

    The Court held that prima facie<\/i>, no case of passing-off had been made out and no claim to injunction could be sustained by Subway in view of the modifications that Infinity Food had carried out. Therefore, the prayer for interim injunction was dismissed.<\/p>\n

    [Subway IP LLC v. Infinity Food, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 150<\/a>, Order dated 12-1-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    For the Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi<\/p>\n

    Advocate Peeyoosh Kalra<\/p>\n

    Advocate Gaurav Mukerjee<\/p>\n

    Advocate Suyash Malhotra<\/p>\n

    For the Defendants: Advocate Rishabh Singh<\/p>\n

    Advocate Pushkar Sood<\/p>\n

    Advocate K.P. Singh<\/p>\n

    Advocate Anshuman Sood<\/p>\n

    Advocate Keshav Rai<\/p>\n

    Advocate Vishwajeet Singh<\/p>\n

    Advocate Tarkar<\/p>\n\n

    *Simranjeet Kaur, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The Delhi High Court dismissed Subway's plea for injunction for its mark “SUBWAY” against Infinity Food's mark “SUBERB” in a trade mark infringement case and held that the appearance of Infinity Food's red and white “SUBERB” mark could not be said to be deceptively similar to Subway's device mark, “SUBWAY”.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":279267,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[54525,52955,53066,54523,54520,2943,8341,44998,53143,54524,54521,54519,46235,2616,52951,54522,53459],"class_list":["post-281807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-anti-dissection-rule","tag-deceptively-similar","tag-device-mark","tag-generic","tag-infinity-food","tag-injunction","tag-intellectual-property-rights","tag-logo","tag-phonetically","tag-publici-juris","tag-sub","tag-suberb","tag-subway","tag-Trade_Mark","tag-trade-marks-act-1999","tag-veg","tag-word-mark"],"yoast_head":"\n\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-01-17T09:30:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-01-20T06:01:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"391\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"311\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"name\":\"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-01-17T09:30:31+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-01-20T06:01:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"width\":391,\"height\":311,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway’s plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food’s mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d | SCC Times","description":"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d","og_description":"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-01-17T09:30:31+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-01-20T06:01:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":391,"height":311,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/","name":"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway's plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food's mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","datePublished":"2023-01-17T09:30:31+00:00","dateModified":"2023-01-20T06:01:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In a case wherein, Subway filed for an injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against the mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d, C. Hari Shankar, J. dismissed application","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","width":391,"height":311,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/subway-and-suberb-not-phonetically-and-decptively-similar-delhi-high-court-dismisses-subway-plea-for-injunction-for-its-mark-subway-against-infinity-food-mark-suberb-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u201cSUBWAY\u201d and \u201cSUBERB\u201d not phonetically and deceptively similar; Delhi High Court dismisses Subway’s plea for injunction for its mark \u201cSUBWAY\u201d against Infinity Food’s mark \u201cSUBERB\u201d"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":285570,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/novaegis-phonetically-identical-and-deceptively-similar-to-novartis-delhi-high-court-grants-ad-interim-injunction-in-favour-of-novartis-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":0},"title":"\u2018NOVAEGIS\u2019 is phonetically identical and deceptively similar to \u2018NOVARTIS\u2019; Delhi High Court grants ad-interim injunction in favour of \u2018NOVARTIS\u2019","author":"Simranjeet","date":"February 27, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court opined that \u2018NOVAEGIS\u2019 was, phonetically identical to \u2018NOVARTIS\u2019, when tested from the point of view of a customer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection and thus, granted ad-interim injunction in favour of \u2018NOVARTIS\u2019.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277907,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/23\/delhi-high-court-grants-permanent-injunction-along-with-2-lakhs-damages-in-favour-of-ebay-in-a-trade-mark-infringement-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction along with 2 lakhs damages in favour of eBay in a trade mark infringement suit","author":"Editor","date":"November 23, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the mark \u2018Shopibay\u2019 which was similar to the plaintiff's mark \u2018eBay\/EBAY\u2019, the Single Judge Bench of Navin Chawla, J. granted permanent injunction to \u2018eBay\u2019 and held that the adoption of mark by the defendant\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277941,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/23\/delhi-high-court-confirms-ad-interim-ex-parte-order-of-injunction-passed-in-favour-of-sun-pharmaceutical-industries-ltd-for-its-mark-forzest-cost-of-rs-10-lakhs-imposed-for-concealing\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court confirms ad-interim ex-parte order of injunction passed in favour of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. for its mark \u2018FORZEST\u2019; Cost of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed for concealing material facts","author":"Editor","date":"November 23, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a trade mark infringement case where the ex-parte ad-interim order of injunction was challenged, the Single Judge Bench of Navin Chawla, J. confirmed the order of injunction passed by this Court in favour of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and imposed Rs. 10,00,000 costs on\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":296078,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/05\/delhi-high-court-grants-injunction-to-sun-pharma-for-its-mark-instamet-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court restrains Glemark Pharmaceuticals from using \u201cINDAMET\u201d mark; grants injunction to Sun Pharma for its mark \u201cINSTAMET\u201d","author":"Simranjeet","date":"July 5, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The two competing marks \u201cISTAMET\u201d and \u201cINDAMET\u201d are clearly structurally and phonetically similar, and when seen from the eyes of consumer of average intelligence having imperfect recollection, there are high chances of confusion and deception. Confusion surrounding the mode of administration of a drug can lead to misuse and potential\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281267,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/09\/delhi-high-court-confirms-ex-parte-ad-interim-injunction-favour-aiwa-japan-company-mark-in-trade-mark-infringement-suit-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court confirms ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of AIWA Co. Ltd., a Japan company for its mark \u201cAIWA\u201d in a trade mark infringement suit","author":"Editor","date":"January 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court held that the use of mark \u201cAIVVA\u201d by Aivva Enterprises (P) Ltd. was phonetically similar to the mark \u201cAIWA\u201d of Aiwa Co. Ltd. and thus, caused confusion in the market. Therefore, the Court confirmed ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of the mark \u201cAIWA\u201d in a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":297335,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/20\/exclusive-monopoly-cannot-be-claimed-on-generic-word-vasundhra-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":281807,"position":5},"title":"\u201cCan\u2019t claim exclusive monopoly on generic word \u2018VASUNDHRA\u2019\u201d; Delhi High Court refuses to grant interim injunction to Vasundhra Jewellers","author":"Simranjeet","date":"July 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA party that has made an assertion that its mark is dissimilar to a cited mark and obtains a registration based on that assertion, is not to be entitled to obtain an interim injunction against the proprietor of the cited mark, on the ground that the mark is deceptively similar.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/281807","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=281807"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/281807\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/279267"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=281807"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=281807"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=281807"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}