No provision under Trademark contemplates defence of honest & concurrent to a charge of infringement

Kei Industries Limited Vs Raman Kwatra & Anr (Delhi High Court)

Facts- Kei Industries Limited alleging infringement, by the defendants, of its registered trademark “KEI”, of which it had registration both as a word mark and as the device mark. Accordingly, the plaint sought a decree of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiff’s registered trademarks either physically or via online platforms, along with other prayers for rendition of accounts, delivery up and declaration.

Conclusion- Held that it is apparent that the letters “KEI” have been copied by Defendant 1 in exactely the same lettering, font and style in which they find place in the “KWALITY” mark , which was validly registered in favour of Rajiv Kwatra. Prima facie, Defendant 1 had no right to use the said mark which, in respect of its dominant KEL part, was identical to the “KWALITY”, the right to use in respect of which had been specifically assigned by OPK to Rajiv Kwatra and which stood validly registered by Rajiv Kwatra.

Held that if one were to construe the expression “other kinds of electrical and electronic instruments” ejusdem generis to the words which precede the said expression in registration certificates issued to the plaintiff, the electrical and electronic instruments which would be covered by the said expression would be analogous to electrical wires and cables, electrical switch gears, control panels, circuit breakers, transformers, amplifiers, switches and fuses of all kinds.

Thus, prima facie, it was observed that electrical fans, geysers and water immersion rods, in respect of which defendants were using the impugned KEI mark were allied and similar to the goods in respect of which the plaintiff’s word mark and device mark were registered.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.