The court held that if the defendant company K K and Company Delhi Pvt. Ltd is permitted to manufacture and sell goods bearing the ‘Prestige’ trademark it would cause “irreparable injury” to the goodwill and reputation of TTK Prestige Ltd, the manufacturers of pressure cookers.

A single judge bench of Justice Amit Bansal on February 20 held that a prima facie case of infringement and a case of passing off (selling goods as the goods of another) was made out by TTK Prestige Ltd. (File Photo). The Delhi High Court has recently restrained a private company from manufacturing, selling, and advertising gas stoves, kitchenware, and other goods using the ‘Prestige’ trademark in a trademark infringement lawsuit. A single judge bench of Justice Amit Bansal on February 20 held that a prima facie case of infringement and a case of passing off (selling goods as the goods of another) was made out by TTK Prestige Ltd. The court held that if the defendant company K K and Company Delhi Pvt. Ltd is permitted to manufacture and sell goods bearing the ‘Prestige’ trademark it would cause “irreparable injury” to the goodwill and reputation of TTK Prestige Ltd. “Accordingly, the present application is allowed and the defendant no.1 (the company), its directors, sister concerns, assigns in business, distributors, stockists, dealers and agents are injuncted from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, exporting, advertising in any manner including on the internet and websites, directly or indirectly dealing in gas stoves or in any kitchenware, cookware and/or cognate/allied/related goods under the mark or any other mark which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff‟s ‘Prestige’ trademarks,” the HC held, while allowing TTK Prestige’s interim application. The High Court observed that Prestige had been selling its products under the said trademark since 1955 and the earliest registration of its mark went way back to December 14, 1949. The HC perused through the invoices submitted by Prestige from 2007 to show sales of “gas stoves‟ and advertisements from 2019 to show that they were in the business of selling “gas stoves‟ under the ‘Prestige’ trademark. The defendant company also did not dispute the fact that TTK Prestige had been selling ‘pressure cookers’ under ‘Prestige’ trademark much before the defendant company . The HC rejected the defendant’s argument that ‘pressure cookers’ and ‘gas stoves’ are different products and therefore, there would be no confusion in the market. The court referred to a 2006 decision of another bench wherein the goods sold by the parties, in that case, were also ‘LPG stoves’ and ‘pressure cookers’ both being sold under the same trademark ‘United’. The HC in that case held that goods sold by the parties are “both used as kitchen appliances and therefore, there would be confusion for the consumer using both the products”. Applying the decision in the present case the HC said, “The use of the trademark ‘Prestige’ by the defendant no.1 in respect of “gas stoves‟ is likely to cause confusion in the market as the public at large would associate the said products of the defendant no.1 with the plaintiff”.  The defendant company had also relied on the Small Scale Industries (SSI) certificate from December 21,1982, BIS licence from April 24, 1982, as well as excise documents from May 8, 1985, in support of its submission that it is a prior user of the trademark. The HC, however, observed that the SSI certificate did not mention the ‘Prestige’ trademark and further both the BIS licence as well as excise documents from dates are after the ‘Prestige’ trademark was registered by TTK Prestige. The court, hence, held that the defendant company had failed to establish that it was using the Prestige trademark before the trademark was registered by TTK Prestige.