Delhi High Court Cracks Down on Trademark Infringement, Grants Interim Injunction

Delhi High Court Cracks Down on Trademark Infringement, Grants Interim Injunction

Introduction

The Delhi High Court has passed an order in the case of Sanjeev Juneja & Ors vs Haridwar International Ayurveda & Ors, granting an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of the plaintiffs.

Factual Background

The plaintiffs claim to be the registered proprietors of the trademark "PET SAFFA" and have been using it since 2016 for medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations. They allege that the defendants have infringed their trademark by using a similar mark "PET FIT" for identical goods.

Issues

1. Trademark Infringement: Whether the defendants' use of the mark "PET FIT" constitutes trademark infringement.

2. Interim Injunction: Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the impugned mark.

Contentions of the Parties

Plaintiffs' Contentions:

• The plaintiffs have been using the trademark "PET SAFFA" since 2016 and have acquired a reputation and goodwill in the market.
• The defendants' use of the mark "PET FIT" is deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' trademark and constitutes trademark infringement.

Defendants' Contentions:

• The defendants did not appear in court to contest the plaintiffs' claims.

Reasoning & Analysis

The bench of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora finds that the plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case in their favor, and the balance of convenience lies in their favor. The court notes that the defendants' use of the impugned mark "PET FIT" is deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' registered trademark "PET SAFFA".

Decision

The court grants an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the impugned mark or any other mark identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' trademark.

Implications

The court's decision highlights the importance of protecting trademarks and the consequences of trademark infringement.

In this case the plaintiff was represented by Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Ms. Sushma Kumari, Mr. Sanjit Singh and Ms. Suman Gupta, Advocates.