TRADEMARK CASES
N. S. Thread Co. Ltd. v. James Chadwick and Bros.
(AIR 1953 SC 357)
“Deceive or cause confusion”
The real question to decide in such cases is to see as to how
a purchaser, who must be looked upon as an average man of
ordinary intelligence, would react to a particular trade mark,
what association he would form by looking at the trade mark,
and in what respect he would connect the trade mark with
goods which he would be purchasing.
If the trade mark conveys the idea of an Eagle and if an
unwary purchaser is likely to accept the goods of the
Appellants as answering the requisition for Eagle goods,
then undoubtedly the Appellants’ trade mark is one which
would be likely to be deceived or cause confusion. …
Hindustan Lever Limited v. Pioneer
Soap Factory
(Sun and Suraj)
except for the translation of the word “SUN” in Hindi, there is
no similarity. The label of the plaintiff is yellow and blue
whereas the defendant’s label is red in colour with white
background. The sun rays shown on the defendant’s label
are not portrayed on the plaintiff’s label. … Admittedly, the
product is the same, i.e., washing powder. Suraj is the Hindi
translation of the English word “Sun”. … I am satisfied that
mark “Suraj” being equivalent in English to the trade mark
“SUN” is to be considered deceptively similar.
J. C. Eno Limited v. Vishnu Chemical
Company
… there are in India … a very large
number of languages, and that a
very large number of persons in
India know several languages. … a
person knowing a number of
languages would very likely be
deceived if trader translated into
one of the languages…
Ruston and Hormby Ltd. v. Zamindara
Engineering Co.
In an action on the trade mark, that is to say, in an
fringement action, an injunction would issue as soon
as it is proved that the defendant is improperly using
the plaintiff’s mark.
… it is not necessary to prove that A did this
knowingly or with any intent to deceive. It is enough
that the get-up of B’s goods… there is a probability
of confusion between them and the goos of A. No
case of actual deception nor any actual damages
need be proved.
Surya Roshini Ltd. v. Electronic Sound Co.
“Camouflaging an Eagle into vulture by calling it
such is likely to cause confusion” … SURIAN was
similar to the trade mark sun… the word “PRABHAT
(meaning SUN in Hindi) was similar to sun. In the
present case the trade mark of the defendants is not
only the word BHASKAR which means SUN but
there is also a device of SUN alongwith the word
BHASKAR. I am, therefore, of the view that the
defendants’ trade mark BHASKAR with the device
of a SUN is deceptively similar to the mark “SURYA”
of the plaintiffs.
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta
(SC)
Parker, J. in Re Planotist Co. (1906)
You must take the two words. You must judge them,
both by their look and by their sound. You must
consider the goods to which they are to be applied.
You must consider the nature and kind of customer
who would be likely to buy those goods. In fact you
must consider all the surrounding circumstances;
and you must further consider what is likely to
happen If each of those trade marks is used in a
normal way as a trade mark for the goods of the
respective owners of the marks.
Cond…
For deceptive resemblance two important questions
are: (1) who are the persons whom the resemblance
must be likely to deceive or confuse, and(2) what
rules of comparison are to be adopted in judging
whether such resemblance exists. As to confusion, it
is perhaps an appropriate description of the state of
mind of customer who, on seeing a mark thinks that
it differs from the mark on goods which he has
previously brought, but is doubtful whether that
impression is not due to imperfect recollection.
(Kerly on Trade Marks, 8th Edition, p 400)
Cond…
Further it has been observed:
The trade mark is the whole thing- the whole
word has to be considered. … I do not think it
is right to take a part of the word and compare
it with a part of the other word; one word must
be considered as a whole and compared with
the other word as a whole… I think it is a
dangerous method to adopt to divide the word
up and seek to distinguish a portion of it from
a portion of another word.