Skip to main content

DELHI HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INJUNCTION PASSED IN FAVOR V-GUARD

In an appeal filed by Crompton against order passed by Single Judge granting injunction in favor of V-Guard, and restraining Crompton from using their alleged mark “PEBBLE” has been dismissed by the Division Bench of Delhi High Court




BRIEF FACTS 

V-Guard filed a case against Crompton before Delhi High Court restraining them from using the mark “PEBBLE”. It is argued that they are selling the goods like water heater, geysers since the year 2013, under their registered label “PEBBLE” which forms the dominant part of the mark. It has been selling the electric and consumer goods since 1977 under the name V-Guard and claims to have a turnover of over 2600 crores, hence requires protection.

Crompton, on the other hand, that the word “PEBBLE” is a common dictionary word, and not a coined word, hence its exclusive use cannot be granted to anyone. It is further argued that their mark as a whole is visually, phonetically is different. Further, they are using the mark for electric irons, hence the goods which in question are also not similar.

Observations 

  • Even though Sec 29(2) of the Act, is not attracted since goods are dis-similar, still there is prima facie case in favor of the plaintiff who has attained goodwill and reputation by their use since year 2013.
  • Also, the word “PEBBLE” since has no descriptive meaning attached to water heaters, thus, it affords a greater protection, as it is susceptible to be used.
  • Court further observed that merely placing the mark Crompton with the alleged word “Pebble” is no ground of distinguishing the mark of the Plaintiff. Hence, it amounts to passing off and Crompton is restrained from using the said mark.

Challenging the said order, Crompton filed this present appeal, however, same is dismissed by Division Bench of Delhi High Court in light of following observations:-

 The adoption of the word "PEBBLE" for the use on geysers is distinctive and arbitrary and is being used by plaintiff since the year 2013. No worthy explanation has been afforded by the defendant for the adoption of the word "PEBBLE" on its product. It is not the case of defendant that the word "PEBBLE" is common or generic to the trade of electrical appliances. We therefore, find no infirmity in the finding of the Learned Single Judge in this regard that the use of the mark "PEBBLE" by the defendant is prima without due cause and it has adopted the same to gain unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff. 

However, it was stated that the order of dismissal is based on prima facie view of this Court and has nothing to do with the final outcome of the case. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MARRIAGE REGISTRATION PROCESS IN DELHI

 Hello friends today we shall talk about the procedure for registration of marriage in Delhi.   ELIGIBILITY The marriage must have been solemnized either under the Hindu Marriage Act or under the Special Marriage Act, The Groom must have attained the minimum age of 21 years. The bride must be of the age of 18 years at least.   DOCUMENTS REQUIRED Photo ID proofs of both the parties like Aadhar card / PAN card / Voter card Date of birth proofs of both parties like 10 th certificate, etc. Permanent address proof must be there . Marriage photographs and Invitation Card. Passport Size Photographs of both parties. 2 witness in case marriage registered under Hindu Marriage Act or 3 witnesses in case it is registered under the Special Marriage Act along with their respective proofs like PAN CARD/ AADHAR CARD etc. An affidavit from both parties certifying the date of their marriage and more specifically stating that the marriage has not been performed between pers...
1 comment
Read more

BENGALURU CONSUMER COURT IMPOSES PENALTY ON FLIPKART

RECENTLY BENGALURU DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DIRECTED ONLINE MERCHANT FLIPKART TO REFUND AN ANOUNT OF RS. 13,999/- ALONGWITH COMPENSATION OF RS. 10,000/- TO A 80-YEAR OLD FOR CAUSING MENTAL AGONY. BRIEF FACTS An 80 -Year Old Consumer ordered a treadmill on the online site of Opposite Party Flipkart. In compliance the treadmill was delivered to the consumer. At the time of installation of the product, it was revealed by the technician that the treadmill is faulty. On coming to know that the consumer returned the product to Flipkart and sought replacement. Initially Flipkart failed to replace the product but in some time, the replaced product was delivered to consumer, however, despite requests they failed to send the technician. When consumer tried to fix the same on its own, it was found that the product was of some other company. In other words, it was not the same product which has been initially ordered by the consumer. With no resolution, the consumer was left with no other option bu...
Post a Comment
Read more

KERALA HIGH COURT BARS ENTRY OF 10 YEAR GIRL FROM ENTERING SABARIMALA TEMPLE

RECENTLY KERALA HIGH COURT DISMISSED WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE  226 OF CONSTITUTION FILED BY FATHER ON BEHALF OF HIS 10- YEAR OLD GIRL FOR SEEKING AN ORDER TO ENTER SABARIMALA TEMPLE. THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF REVIEW PENDING ON THE SAID ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH OF THE APEX COURT. BRIEF FACTS 10 year old girl filed a writ petition before the Kerala HIgh Court seeking relief of mandamus seeking directions to Travancore Devaswom Board to allow her to offer pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple without taking into account the restrictions of age since she has not attained puberty or in the alternative to allow the request of the minor on sympathetic grounds. It is contended by the Petitioner that they are planning to visit the temple since long and it has been delayed due to onset of Covid earlier. Now, the family is under distress and also the father of Petitioner is not in good health. Hence, they have applied the same online but since in the meanwhile the age of Petit...
Post a Comment
Read more