Title: TTK Prestige Ltd. v. Arjun Ram & Anr.
Citation: CS(COMM) 915/2022
Decided on: 19.10.2023
Coram: Justice C. Hari Shankar
Introduction
The Delhi High Court in this case granted an interlocutory injunction, both on the grounds of design infringement as well as passing off, by the defendants, of its product as that of the plaintiff. Justice C. Hari Shankar further stated that the defendants’ trade dress is nearly exact replica of the plaintiff’s trade dress and as there are no distinguishing characteristics between the two, aside from the name itself, that would help a consumer with average intelligence and, more importantly, imperfect memory to be able to tell the former from the latter when they are seen at different times.
Facts of the case
The plaintiff manufactures pressure cookers under the name “PRESTIGE”. This case deals with alleged design piracy and trade mark infringement and passing off, by the defendants, of the Svachh line of pressure cookers manufactured by the plaintiff. The defendants sell the pressure cookers under the name “PARISTONE”. Aggrieved by this, the plaintiff has approached this court.
Court’s observation and analysis
The Delhi High Court while giving judgement made the observation that even though the issue of trademark infringement may be debatable given the phonetic differences between the marks “PRESTIGE” and “PARISTONE,” the defendants’ trade dress is nearly exact replica of the plaintiff’s trade dress, featuring black lines or swirls beneath identically printed white letters in a similar font on a matching pink background. It is evident that there are no distinguishing characteristics between the two, aside from the name itself, that would help a consumer with average intelligence and, more importantly, imperfect memory to be able to tell the former from the latter when they are seen at different times. As a result, the court determined that there was a case of passing off since the defendants had obviously replicated the plaintiff’s trade dress as far as the mark’s visual look was concerned.
Hence, the plaintiff was granted an interlocutory injunction, both on the grounds of design infringement as well as passing off, by the defendants, of its product as that of the plaintiff. The defendants would not, however, be restrained, for the present, from using the mark PARISTONE in any other trade dress, which is not similar to the trade dress of the petitioner’s mark, on pressure cookers which do not imitate or infringe the registered design of the plaintiff’s Svachh range of pressure cookers.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Amrita Rout