Case Title: Havells India Limited Vs Cab Rio Industries
Date of Order: February 17, 2025
Case No.: CS(COMM) 995/2024 & I.A. 44614/2024
Court: High Court of Delhi
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal
Facts of the Case:
Havells India Limited, a well-established electrical equipment manufacturer, filed a suit against Cab-Rio Industries, alleging trademark infringement and passing off of its trademark "REO." Havells, which has been using the "REO" mark since 2012, contended that Cab-Rio's use of the mark "CAB-RIO" was misleading and aimed at unfairly benefiting from Havells' market reputation.
The plaintiff highlighted that the "REO" mark was registered and declared a "well-known trademark" by a previous court order. The defendants, however, argued that their mark "CAB-RIO" had been in use since 2017 and was also registered under Class 9. They claimed that "CAB" in their name was an abbreviation for "cables."
Issues:
1. Whether Cab-Rio's use of the mark "CAB-RIO" infringed upon Havells' trademark rights?
2. Whether the adoption of "CAB-RIO" constituted passing off?
3. Whether the similarity in phonetics and structure between "REO" and "CAB-RIO" was likely to cause confusion among consumers?
4. Whether Havells' prior use of "REO" gave it superior rights over Cab-Rio?
Reasoning and Analysis of the Judge:
1. Prior Use & Goodwill:
The court determined that Havells had prior use of the "REO" mark since 2012, while Cab-Rio only began using "CAB-RIO" in 2017.
Havells' extensive sales turnover (₹946.86 crore in 2023-24) and advertising expenditures demonstrated strong brand recognition.
2. Deceptive Similarity & Phonetics:
The court found that "REO" and "CAB-RIO" were phonetically and structurally similar.
The word "RIO" in Cab-Rio’s mark was prominently similar to "REO," leading to potential consumer confusion.
3. Bad Faith Adoption:
The defendants failed to provide a credible explanation for adopting "RIO" in their brand name.
Their marketing materials suggested an attempt to capitalize on Havells' established reputation.
4. Likelihood of Confusion:
The court ruled that electrical products are often purchased by workers or builders who may not analyze minor distinctions in brand names.
The similarity was sufficient to cause confusion among consumers with imperfect recollection.
Decision of the Judge:
The court granted an interim injunction restraining Cab-Rio from using "CAB-RIO" or any similar mark in relation to electrical cables and wires.
