M/S. CP Century Hardware Pvt. Ltd. v. Divyam Gupta

"When deceptive similarity damages brand trust"

Overview :

This case centers around the protection of a registered trademark from deceptive similarity. CP Century Hardware Pvt. Ltd., a reputed hardware manufacturer, alleged that Divyam Gupta had infringed their trademark by marketing and selling similar goods under an almost identical name and logo. The case sheds light on the legal standards for “deceptive similarity” and enforcement of statutory rights under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Facts & Findings :

• CP Century Hardware had been using a registered trademark in connection with its door and furniture fittings, building a strong market reputation.

  
  

• Divyam Gupta was found selling similar hardware products under a nearly identical mark, causing confusion among consumers.

  
  

• Evidence included similarities in packaging, stylized logo, and trade channels.

  
  

• The defendant failed to provide justification for adopting the mark or proving prior usage or honest concurrent use.

  
  

• The court noted that such usage created a likelihood of confusion in the minds of consumers and was detrimental to the goodwill of the plaintiff.

Suggestion :

Businesses must conduct thorough trademark searches and due diligence before adopting any mark. Even minor visual or phonetic similarities with a registered trademark can lead to legal liability. Moreover, companies must actively monitor the market to prevent misuse or dilution of their brand identity.

Judgment :

⦁ Date: December 13, 2022

⦁ The Delhi High Court held that the defendant’s mark was deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff and amounted to infringement under Sections 29 and 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.

⦁ An injunction was passed restraining Divyam Gupta from using the impugned mark.

⦁ The court also awarded damages and costs to CP Century Hardware for loss of reputation and legal expenses.