Wednesday, March 13, 2024

Hero Motocorp Limited & Anr vs Pawan Kumar

Difference of Product and Trademark Infringement 
 
In this case, the Plaintiff initiated a lawsuit based on their proprietary rights in the trademark "HERO High" in relation to bicycles, bicycle parts, and related products. The Plaintiff's trademark has been registered since 1966, indicating long-standing use and recognition in the market.

On the other hand, the Defendant adopted a similar trademark "HERO" for potash alum bars, which are unrelated to bicycles or bicycle parts. Potash alum bars are typically used for purposes such as water purification, tanning, and as a deodorant.

Despite the differences in the products offered by both parties, the Plaintiff argued that the adoption of a similar trademark by the Defendant could lead to confusion among consumers, diluting the distinctiveness of the Plaintiff's trademark and potentially causing harm to their brand reputation.

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi granted an injunction in favor of the Plaintiff after observing a prima facie case in their favor. This indicates that the court found sufficient evidence to support the Plaintiff's claim of trademark infringement based on the similarity between the trademarks and the potential for confusion among consumers.

The court's decision highlights the importance of protecting trademark rights, regardless of the specific products or industries involved. Even though the Defendant's products were unrelated to bicycles or bicycle parts, the court recognized the risk of consumer confusion arising from the similarity between the trademarks.

Case Title: Hero Motocorp Limited & Anr vs Pawan Kumar 
Order Date: 05.02.2024
Case No. CS Comm 90 of 2024
Name of Court: Delhi High Court 
Neutral Citation:Not available
Name of Hon'ble Judge: Sanjeev Narula H.J.

Disclaimer:

Ideas, thoughts, views, information, discussions and interpretation expressed herein are being shared in the public Interest. Readers' discretion is advised as these are subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception, interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman,
IP Adjutor - Patent and Trademark Attorney,
Email: ajayamitabhsuman@gmail.com,
Ph No: 9990389539

No comments:

Post a Comment

Featured Post

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PROVE THE TRADEMARK  REGISTRA...

My Blog List

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Search This Blog