Mark ‘SoEasy’ being suggestive in nature is liable to be protected under Trade Marks Act

Ashim Kumar Ghosh Vs Registrar of Trade Marks (Delhi High Court)

Delhi High Court held that the mark ‘SoEasy’ for Hindi language learning is suggestive in nature and it is settled law that suggestive Trade Marks are liable to be protected under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and order is set aside.

Facts- The present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (“Act”) against the order dated 20.05.2025 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the Respondent in Trade Mark Application No. 5799569 in Class 16 for the Trade Mark ‘SoEasy’ (“Appellant’s Mark”) filed by the Appellant.

Conclusion- In the present case, the Appellant’s Mark ‘SoEasy’ used for the Appellant’s Hindi language learning, teaching and testing platform suggests that the learning, teaching and testing of Hindi language would be made easy and uncomplicated or would require minimal effort, on the Appellant’s platform and, therefore, it is suggestive in nature as it would require the consumers’ imagination, thought and perception to reach a conclusion regarding the nature of the Appellant’s product on offer.

Held that the Appellant’s Mark is not descriptive of the qualities, ingredients or characteristics of the Appellant’s product. It is well-settled that suggestive Trade Marks are liable to be protected under the Act, while descriptive Trade Marks are not entitled to protection. As the Appellant’s Mark is suggestive in nature, it is entitled to protection under the Act. Thus, even though there is no procedural infirmity with the Impugned Order, interference is required on merits of the decision of the Respondent. Accordingly, the present Appeal is hereby allowed and the Impugned Order passed by the Respondent in Trade Mark Application No. 5799569 in Class 16 for the Mark ‘SoEasy’ is set aside.