Trademark Dispute: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Mintage Steels Limited

Trademark Dispute: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Mintage Steels Limited

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction in favor of Mintage Steels Limited and Rajeev Bansal, restraining Neelam Jain (trading as M/s Padam Shri Steel) from using a deceptively similar trade dress/packaging for its products.

Factual Background

The plaintiffs, Mintage Steels Limited and Rajeev Bansal, are the registered proprietors of the “MINTAGE” trademark and have been using it since 2006 for household and kitchen utensils. They alleged that the defendant adopted the mark “SINTAGE”, along with identical packaging, for similar products, thereby infringing their rights and causing consumer confusion.

Procedural Background

The plaintiffs instituted a suit seeking a permanent injunction against the defendant, restraining infringement, passing off, dilution, and tarnishment of their mark. They also alleged mala fide adoption and unauthorized use of deceptively similar trademark, packaging, and copyrighted artwork.

Issues

1. Whether the defendant’s use of the impugned trademark and trade dress amounts to trademark infringement and passing off?

2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the impugned trademark and packaging?

Contentions of the Parties

• Plaintiffs’ Contention: The plaintiffs argued that the defendant’s packaging was deceptively similar to their own, with identical colour combinations and placement of features, which was likely to mislead consumers and erode the plaintiffs’ goodwill.
• Defendant’s Contention: The defendant did not appear to contest the matter before the court.

Reasoning and Analysis

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed that the defendant’s product packaging was virtually identical to that of the plaintiffs, including the colour scheme, layout, and placement of essential elements. The court found that such similarity was likely to cause confusion among consumers and could harm the plaintiffs’ reputation and market standing.

Outcome

The court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or distributing products bearing the infringing packaging/trade dress. The defendant was also directed to remove all listings of its products from e-marketplaces and social media platforms displaying the impugned packaging.

Representation

• For the Plaintiffs: Mr. V.K. Puri, Ms. Anshima Puri, and Mr. Deepak Dhyani, Advocates.
• For the Defendant: None appeared.