- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- C. Hari Shankar
- Outcome
- Set aside
Headnote
Appeal allowed and the interlocutory injunction set aside. Beyond the shared element "Jeeva" and "Jiva", the Division Bench found no visual or conceptual similarity between the competing trade dresses: the appellants' mark features herbal plants while the respondents' consists of a lotus flower. The phrase "By Baidyanath" in the appellants' mark operates as a source identifying feature, and together with the prefix "Shatam" produces sufficient dissimilarity that confusion or association does not arise. Passing off failed independently for want of misrepresentation, which remains a crucial ingredient, and no material was placed on record showing actual or likely damage to goodwill. Having found no deceptive similarity, the Court did not examine goodwill and damage.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.