Search Indian IP Case Law
Judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on patents, trade marks, copyright, designs and geographical indications — organised by Act and section, each with a link to the judgment on the court’s website.
11 results
for “Likelihood of Confusion”
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta
Deceptive similarity between trade marks must be assessed by comparing the marks as a whole for their overall phonetic, visual and structural resemblance, from the standpoint of a person of average intelligence and imperfect recol…
AcquiescenceDeceptive SimilarityHonest Concurrent UseImperfect RecollectionTrade MarksCadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
In assessing deceptive similarity between trade marks for medicinal products, courts must apply a stricter standard than for ordinary goods because confusion can endanger public health, having regard to the nature of the marks, th…
Deceptive SimilarityPassing OffPharmaceutical TrademarkPhonetic SimilarityTrade MarksCorn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd.
In opposition proceedings, the reputation of a trade mark for assessing likelihood of confusion attaches to the mark itself and not merely to the reputation of the proprietor; deceptive similarity may be found even between goods t…
Deceptive SimilarityGoods Of Same DescriptionOppositionReputation Of MarkTrade MarksHamdard National Foundation (India) & Anr. v. Sadar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
While composite trade marks must be compared as a whole under the anti-dissection rule, it is permissible to examine a dominant or significant common element in determining the overall commercial impression, and a composite mark m…
Anti-Dissection RuleComposite MarksDeceptive SimilarityTrade DressTrade MarksHavells India Limited & Anr. v. Havai Home Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Even a registered proprietor may be restrained from using a trade mark where the ingredients of passing off are established. Section 27(2) preserves the common-law remedy of passing off notwithstanding the statutory rights arising…
Anti-Dissection RuleDeceptive SimilarityDishonest AdoptionPassing OffTrade MarksLaxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah & Anr.
A trading or business name, though not a registered trade mark, is protectable in a passing off action once it has acquired goodwill through use; the tort protects established business reputation rather than the name itself, and n…
GoodwillInterim InjunctionPassing OffPersonal Name MarksTrade MarksNandhini Deluxe v. Karnataka Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd.
Registration in a particular class of goods does not confer a monopoly over the entire class; likelihood of confusion under Section 11 must be assessed by the real nature and target consumers of the competing goods, and honest, lo…
ClassificationDeceptive SimilarityDissimilar GoodsHonest Concurrent UseTrade MarksReliance Industries Limited v. Pawan Kumar Gupta & Ors.
In assessing the likelihood of confusion for interim relief, courts must apply a more stringent standard where the infringing goods are edible products sold through online marketplaces to unsophisticated consumers, since even mino…
Dynamic InjunctionOnline InfringementPassing OffTrade DressTrade MarksSatyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
A domain name has all the characteristics of a trade mark and is entitled to protection against passing off; the fact that the Trade Marks Act, 1999 does not specifically legislate on domain names does not exclude a domain name fr…
Deceptive SimilarityDomain NamesGoodwillOnline InfringementGeographical IndicationsScotch Whisky Association & Anr. v. Pravara Sahakari Shakar Karkhana Ltd.
Reputation and goodwill in a geographical class name vest collectively in the genuine producers of that class of goods, entitling any of them to restrain, by a passing off action, a trader who uses get-up, imagery or descriptive w…
Deceptive SimilarityExtended Passing OffGeographical IndicationPassing Off