YUV News Logo
YuvNews
Open in the YuvNews app
OPEN

Breaking News

Economy/Business

Delhi HC restrains electric company from using 'KEI' trademark

Delhi HC restrains electric company from using 'KEI' trademark

New Delhi,  The Delhi High Court has restrained an electrical company from infringing the trademark logo of KEI industries.

"I have found there to be a prima facie case of infringement, by the defendants, of the plaintiff's registered trademarks," Justice C. Hari Shankar said in an order dated May 17.

In the plea, KEI Industries Ltd, the plaintiff, alleged infringement by the defendant Kwality Electrico (India), of its registered trademark "KEI", of which it has registration both as a word mark and as the device mark.

The plaint was seeking 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 a rendition of accounts, delivery up, and declaration.

During the hearing, it was noted that the plaintiff holds a valid and subsisting word mark registration for the word 'KEI', in respect of electric wires and cables. Any use, by any other party, of the acronym 'KEI', in respect of identical or similar goods, would amount to infringement.

In the order, Justice Hari Shankar stated: "I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has succeeded in making out a prima facie case for an interlocutory injunction, restraining the defendants, or their agents, sister concerns, or any entity incorporated by the Defendants or anyone acting for and on their behalf as the case may be, from using the impugned mark, in relation to any electrical goods or instruments, including electrical fans, room coolers, geysers, electric heating apparatus, etc., or any allied or similar goods, pending disposal of the present suit."

The judge also observed: "I do not deem it necessary to burden this judgement with a discussion of all the judgements cited at the Bar, many of which are, in any event, merely interlocutory orders, which cannot be said to be of binding precedential authority."

"The present stay application is allowed accordingly," it read.

Related Posts