[ad_1]
The Delhi High Court recently passed an interim order restraining ‘NIC Natural Ice Creams’ from using the ‘NATURAL’/’NATURALS’ ice cream trademark in a suit for trademark infringement.
A single judge bench of Justice Jyoti Singh on October 19 granted an “ex parte ad interim injunction” in favour of the plaintiffs Siddhant Ice Creams LLP & others, holding that they had made out a “prima facie case for grant of the injunction” that the “balance of convenience also lies in their favour” and if the injunction is not granted the plaintiffs are likely to “suffer irreparable loss”.
The plaintiffs had argued that “NATURAL and NATURALS have become a household mark” and attained the status of an iconic brand for ice creams and ice cream-based products, being sold in 42 locations across the country including Delhi. “During the course of business, the logo was created, of which ‘NATURAL’ is an essential and prominent feature. Plaintiffs have registrations in NATURAL logo, its adaptations/variations/extensions in classes such as 30, 29, 42 etc. which are valid and subsisting…Plaintiffs have established a network of 140 franchisees in 42 cities across India and extensive advertisements are published on various social media platforms such as Facebook, twitter etc. The sales have been steadily increasing over the years and for the year 2022-23, upto 30.09.2022 31,14,666 kilos of ice creams have been sold by the franchisees,” the order records.
It was the plaintiffs’ case that defendant no. 1, who is a former partner in one of the plaintiffs’ franchisees, is wrongfully using the Natural family marks in relation to ice creams and related products. The plaintiffs argued that defendant no. 1 had dishonestly registered marks as ‘NIC Natural Ice Creams’ by incorporating the NATURAL mark, which is an essential part of the plaintiffs’ trademark and is deceptively similar.
They claimed that defendant no. 1 was aware that ‘NIC’ was commonly used as an “acronym for the Natural ice cream business” and the mark also uses an identical shade of green colour as used by the plaintiffs which enhances the similarity. The plaintiffs further argued the defendants had used a similar packaging for the products as the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs additionally said that when consumers search for the defendant’s ice cream products using Google search, information on the plaintiffs ‘Natural’ ice cream business is reflected in the result page indicating an association. “The immense goodwill and reputation garnered by the plaintiffs are being encashed by Defendant No. 1 to pass off its goods by misrepresenting to the consumers that the products of Defendant No. 1 emanate from the Plaintiffs,” the order records.
Granting the injunction the HC held that till the next date of hearing the ‘NIC Natural Ice Creams’ were restrained from using the plaintiffs’ marks ‘NATURAL’, ‘NATURALS’ or using ‘NIC Natural Ice Creams’, ‘NIC’, in any form or manner, including any marks identical or deceptively similar, or from adopting same colours, trade dress and packaging for their products so as to amount to passing off”.
The HC further restrained the defendants from using the domain names ‘nicicecreams.com,’ ‘nicnaturalicecreams.com’ or any other domain name, email address or handle containing the mark NATURAL in it. The HC also restrained the defendants from using the plaintiffs’ marks ‘NATURAL’ or ‘NATURALS’ as “metatags” or purchasing the same as keywords under Google’s AdWords programme to advertise their products.
Issuing summons in the suit, the HC directed the defendants to file their written statement within 30 days from the date of receipt of the summons. The matter is next listed before the Joint Registrar on December 21.
[ad_2]
Source link