The Supreme Industries Limited filed a commercial IP suit against Moorthi Rabeha for trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and passing off, alleging adoption of "SUPREME" mark since 1987 for plastic products with registrations in class 17 and others, stylized label with copyright, and massive goodwill from sales over Rs.10,000 crores in 2023-24; discovered defendant's "SUPREMES GOLD" registration in class 19 in June 2024, filed rectification, and suit in October 2024 upon finding goods, seeking interim injunction. Defendant defended claiming "SUPREME" descriptive and common, marks dissimilar in color/font/layout, own use since 2015 with registration, and plaintiff's concealment of class 19 refusal. Court reasoned deceptive similarity visually/phonetically/structurally as defendant copied essential stylized "SUPREME" adding 's' and "GOLD" dishonestly to ride on goodwill, defendant's registration ex facie invalid under sections 9/11 as likely to confuse average imperfect-recollecting consumer for identical goods, plaintiff proved prior use/goodwill/reputation without needing actual damage, balance of convenience and irreparable harm favored plaintiff despite defendant's registration. Interim injunction granted restraining defendant from using "SUPREMES GOLD" or similar marks.
- In passing off, deceptive similarity is assessed by overall impression on average consumer with imperfect recollection, considering visual, phonetic, structural aspects holistically without dissection: The Supreme Industries Limited v. Moorthi Rabeha, Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024 (Bombay High Court, 19/01/2026), paras 21-24 (citing Parle Products (P) Ltd. v. J.P. & Co., (1972) 1 SCC 618).
- Court can grant interim injunction against registered trademark if registration is ex facie illegal, fraudulent, or shocks conscience, despite section 28, as validity challenge at interlocutory stage possible on strong prima facie case: The Supreme Industries Limited v. Moorthi Rabeha, Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024 (Bombay High Court, 19/01/2026), paras 25-28 (citing Lupin Ltd. v. Johnson & Johnson, 2015 (1) Mh.L.J. 501).
- Passing off requires goodwill, misrepresentation leading to likely deception (no fraudulent intent needed), and likelihood of damage presumed from confusion without actual proof: The Supreme Industries Limited v. Moorthi Rabeha, Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024 (Bombay High Court, 19/01/2026), para 34 (citing Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd. v. Karanveer Singh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1701).
- Registration of label mark without disclaimer confers exclusivity over distinctive word element if no other features, and defendant estopped from claiming descriptiveness after own registration: The Supreme Industries Limited v. Moorthi Rabeha, Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024 (Bombay High Court, 19/01/2026), paras 31-32 (citing Pidilite Industries Ltd. v. Jubilant Agri, 2014 SCC OnLine Bom 50).
Case Title: The Supreme Industries Limited Vs Moorthi Rabeha
Order date: 19/01/2026
Case Number: Interim Application No. 4642 of 2025 in Commercial IP Suit No. 336 of 2024
Neutral Citation: N/A
Name of court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Name of Judge: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh
[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]
