No Arbitration Agreement, No Arbitrator: Supreme Court Voids Award Made Without Municipal Council's Consent, Calls Entire Proceedings "Coram Non Judice" Post-Disposal Miscellaneous Applications Maintainable Only In Rare Situations; Court Becomes Functus Officio After SLP Dismissal: Supreme Court Vague & Omnibus Allegations Against Relatives In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Nipped In The Bud; 7-Year Delay In FIR Fatal: Supreme Court State Can Withdraw Electricity Duty Exemption For Captive Power Plants In Public Interest But Must Give One-Year Notice Period: Supreme Court DSC Personnel Entitled To Second Pension; Shortfall In Service Up To 12 Months Can Be Condoned: Supreme Court Person Professing Christianity Cannot Claim Scheduled Caste Status To Invoke SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Except Matters One May, But Exclude Justice One Cannot: Supreme Court Restores Arbitral Award, Holds State Cannot Be Judge In Its Own Cause On Disputed Breach When State Requisitions Your Vehicle For Elections And It Kills Someone, The State Pays — Not Your Insurer: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Financial Burden Cannot Defeat Constitutional Right to Just Compensation: Supreme Court Unsigned Charge Is A Curable Irregularity, Won't Vitiate Trial Unless 'Failure Of Justice' Is Shown: Supreme Court Tenant Files Fresh Petition Before Rent Authority After Supreme Court Dismisses SLP, Review And Misc Application — Court Calls It "Gross Abuse of Process", Voids Restoration Order Taxation Law | Exemption For Naphtha Depends On 'Intended Use' At Procurement, Not Actual Exclusive Use: Supreme Court Army's Own Grading System Worked Against Women Officers For Years — Supreme Court Grants Permanent Commission, Pension To Short Service Women Officers

Violation of Trademarks Act: Delhi High Court Orders Cancellation of 'GLEE' Trademark Due to Deceptive Similarity

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Delhi High Court, in a judgment delivered on 11th December, 2023, has ordered the cancellation of the 'GLEE' trademark, citing deceptive similarity and a violation of the Trademarks Act, 1999.

The court's decision came in response to two petitions filed by Glen Appliances Pvt. Ltd., seeking the cancellation of the mark 'GLEE' bearing registration numbers 3675390 and 3770965 under classes 11 and 7. These marks were registered in favor of Respondent No. 1, Kunal Singh, and were used for products such as hand mixers, electric kitchen mixers, food mixers, and grinders.

The Petitioner, engaged in the manufacturing and sale of electrical and non-electrical appliances, had been using the mark 'GLEN' since 1998 and had registered it in various classes, including 7, 9, 11, and 21.

The court noted the Commercial Court's previous judgment, which had found clear confusion between the Petitioner's mark 'GLEN' and Respondent No. 1's mark 'GLEE.' The Commercial Court's findings included, "The customers of the plaintiff and defendants belonged to the same class. A consumer of ordinary prudence is bound to be misled by the trademark of the defendants, believing it to be the trademark of the plaintiff."

Furthermore, the court highlighted the violation of Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, stating, "In any event, the registration of the mark 'GLEE' would be violative of Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, 1999."

The court also referred to other legal precedents, such as the case of Blue Heaven Cosmetics Private Limited v. Deepak Arora and Another, which emphasized the importance of distinctive character in trademarks, stating, "The mark 'BLUE HEAVEN' is thus an inherently distinctive mark."

Additionally, the court cited the case of Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. Arvind Kumar Trading and Anr., noting, "The adoption of a deceptively similar mark for identical goods is done with the sole purpose of deceiving unwary customers and riding upon the goodwill and reputation of the Petitioner's mark."

Delhi High Court ordered the cancellation of the 'GLEE' trademark, stating, "Considering the facts of these two cases, the trademark registrations of the Respondent are liable to be cancelled."

Date of Decision: 11 December, 2023

GLEN APPLIANCES PVT. LTD. VS KUNAL SINGHM, B.I.D. AND ANR.

Latest Legal News