The Rajasthan High Court dismissed the appeal filed by M/s Narayan Tea Company against the temporary injunction granted by the Commercial Court, Bikaner, restraining it from using the trademark "SHREE RAJLAXMI" or deceptively similar packaging for tea, pending suit disposal. The respondent, M/s Raj Laxmi Tea Company, a prior registered proprietor (since 2008) and user of "RAJLAXMI" for tea with distinctive packaging, sued for infringement alleging deceptive similarity in mark and label causing confusion.
The appellant denied infringement, claimed distinct packaging, no confusion, familial ties in tea business, and lack of evidence of respondent's goodwill. The trial court granted injunction, finding prima facie infringement. On appeal, the appellant conceded respondent's prior use. The Division Bench upheld the injunction, holding that "RAJLAXMI" is the dominant feature of both marks, the prefix "SHREE" (a common honorific/laudatory term) does not sufficiently distinguish them visually, phonetically or conceptually, creating likelihood of confusion among average consumers for identical FMCG product tea, and allowing use would permit trading on respondent's goodwill; public interest in preventing deception also weighed in favour of injunction.
Law settled in the case:
In comparing trademarks for infringement, courts must assess overall commercial impression, essential/dominant features, and likelihood of confusion/deception in the mind of an average consumer with imperfect recollection. (Para 8)
Addition of a common honorific/laudatory prefix like "SHREE" to a dominant word like "RAJLAXMI" does not materially alter visual, phonetic or conceptual identity or serve to distinguish source, often perceived as variant/extension/association rather than independent origin. (Para 9)
For identical goods like tea (FMCG purchased frequently with ordinary care), even minor similarity suffices to cause confusion as to source/affiliation; subsequent adoption of substantially identical essential features is likely to deceive and trade on prior user's goodwill. (Para 10-11)
Public interest is paramount in trademark infringement adjudication, as confusion affects consumers and general public beyond disputing parties. (Para 12)
Case Title:Narayan Tea Company Vs Raj Laxmi Tea Company :20/01/2026:D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 3149/2024 : [2026:RJ-JD-3302-DB]: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Monga and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yogendra Kumar Purohit
Disclaimer: Readers are advised not to treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation]
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi
#IPUpdate #IPCaselaw #IPCaseLaw #IPLaw #IPRNews #IPIndiaupdate #Trademark #Copyright #DesignLaw #PatentLaw #Law #Legal #IndianIPUpdate #AdvocateAjayAmitabhSuman #IPAdjutor
