Delhi HC Restrains Delhi-Based Company From Using 'Prestige' trademark

While allowing an application moved by TTK Prestige Ltd. against trademark Infringement of its trademark 'PRESTIGE’ the bench of Justice Amit Bansal of Delhi High Court earlier this week dismissed the contention that ‘Pressure Cooker’ & ‘Gas Stoves’ are different products and hence there would be no confusion in the Indian market.

While allowing the application. court injuncted the directors, sister concerns, distributors, stockists, dealers & agents of K.K. AND Company Delhi Pvt. Ltd. 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.

The Court said, “In view of the discussion, a prima facie case of infringement as well as passing off is made out on behalf of the plaintiff. Balance of convenience is also in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant no.1. The plaintiff shall continue to suffer irreparable injury to its goodwill and reputation if the defendant no.1 is permitted to manufacture and sell goods bearing the impugned trademark".

TTK Prestige Ltd. is engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and sale of kitchen home appliances, including ‘pressure cookers’ and ‘gas stoves’ under the brand/trademark ‘PRESTIGE’ since 1955.

It was submitted that the trademark was registered in favour of TTK Prestige Ltd. in June 1981 in respect of “installations for cooking” on a “proposed to be used basis”. Subsequently, it was registered specifically in respect of “gas stoves” on a “proposed to be used basis”, in September 1999. All the trademarks were valid and subsistent. The plaintiff also filed its sales turnover under the trademark ‘PRESTIGE' from the financial year 2007-08 to 2020-21.

K.K. AND Company Delhi Pvt. Ltd. in its written statement argued that they had been continuously using the trademark since January 1981 which is earlier than that of the plaintiff. They claimed that the plaintiff filed its trademark application for the word mark ‘PRESTIGE’ on 16th June on a ‘proposed to be used basis’ and that plaintiff was aware of the user of the trademark ‘PRESTIGE’ by the defendant no. 1 since 1981 in respect of ‘gas stoves.’

In order to show its prior use, the defendant submitted several registration documents of various agencies under the brand name ‘PRESTIGE’. The plaintiff however, argued that the earliest invoice filed by the defendant was later than the registration date of the plaintiff’s mark ‘PRESTIGE’ (word per se) under Class 11 in respect of ‘installations for cooking’ on a ‘proposed to be used basis”.

The Court held that K.K. & Co. had failed to make out a case of ‘continuous user’ as given under Section 34 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 as there were only three invoices showing sales of goods with the said mark and the sales were only made in bulk & on-order basis.

“On the basis of the sales turnover as well as the promotional expenses placed on record by the plaintiff, the plaintiff has also established, at a prima facie stage, immense goodwill & reputation of its trademark ‘PRESTIGE’, albeit in respect of ‘pressure cookers’,” the court said.

The court restrained the defendant from using the trademark ‘PRESTIGE’ or any other mark which is identical or deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff.

Cause Title: TTK PRESTIGE LTD. vs. KK & CO. DELHI PVT. LTD.