"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Delhi High Court Rules 'Aashiqui' Is More Than Just a Word, It's a Brand

04 September 2024 4:40 PM

By: sayum


The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction in favor of Vishesh Films, restraining Super Cassettes Industries Limited (T-Series) from using the title "Tu Hi Aashiqui" or any variation thereof in their upcoming film. The judgment, delivered by Justice Sanjeev Narula on September 2, 2024, emphasized the likelihood of public confusion and trademark infringement, given the strong association of the term "Aashiqui" with the popular film franchise jointly developed by the two parties.

Vishesh Films, co-producer of the renowned "Aashiqui" and "Aashiqui 2," sought to protect its proprietary rights over the "Aashiqui" franchise, arguing that T-Series' proposed film title "Tu Hi Aashiqui" would mislead the public into believing it was part of the same series. Despite T-Series' disclaimer and assurances that their film was unrelated to the "Aashiqui" franchise, Vishesh Films contended that the use of the word "Aashiqui" would inevitably cause confusion due to its strong association with the existing films.

1. Jurisdiction: The court addressed the issue of jurisdiction raised by the defendant, asserting that while the agreements between the parties stipulated exclusive jurisdiction in Mumbai, the claims of trademark infringement and passing off, being tortious in nature, could be entertained by any court where part of the cause of action arose. The court found that it had the requisite jurisdiction to hear the case.

2. Distinctiveness of the "Aashiqui" Trademark: Justice Narula observed that the title "Aashiqui," while suggestive of romance, had acquired distinctiveness through its association with the successful film series. The court rejected T-Series' argument that "Aashiqui" was generic and common to trade, noting that the word had become a strong brand identifier for the "Aashiqui" franchise.

3. Likelihood of Confusion: The court applied the test of deceptive similarity, focusing on the overall impression created by the marks. It found that the use of "Aashiqui" in the proposed film title "Tu Hi Aashiqui" was likely to cause confusion among the public, who might mistakenly associate the new film with the established franchise. The court emphasized that the addition of the words "Tu Hi" and "Hai" did not sufficiently differentiate the title from the trademarked "Aashiqui."

4. Disclaimers and Public Perception: The court was not persuaded by T-Series' argument that a disclaimer would effectively prevent public confusion. Given the strong pre-existing association between "Aashiqui" and the film franchise, the court concluded that the disclaimer was unlikely to alter public perception.

The judgment extensively discussed the principles of trademark law, including the protection of suggestive marks and the importance of preventing public confusion. Justice Narula noted that trademark law is particularly concerned with the initial likelihood of confusion, which can cause significant harm even if temporary. The court also emphasized that in cases involving well-established brands, the balance of convenience and potential irreparable harm weigh heavily in favor of granting injunctions to prevent dilution of the brand.

"The public, upon seeing the title of the Defendant’s proposed film, is likely to assume a connection to the Aashiqui Franchise and infer that the Plaintiff is involved in or endorses the Defendant’s film, thus diluting the strength of the 'Aashiqui' brand," remarked Justice Sanjeev Narula.

The Delhi High Court's decision underscores the importance of protecting well-established trademarks from potential infringement and public confusion, particularly in the context of popular film franchises. The interim injunction prevents T-Series from using the title "Tu Hi Aashiqui," safeguarding the "Aashiqui" brand and setting a precedent for similar cases in the entertainment industry.

Date of Decision: September 2, 2024

Vishesh Films Private Limited vs. Super Cassettes Industries Limited

Similar News