Usha V/s Tusha: Trademark infringement on deceptive similarity; Delhi High Court rules in favour of Usha International Ltd
Usha V/s Tusha: Trademark infringement on deceptive similarity; Delhi High Court rules in favour of Usha International Ltd
The Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of the well-known sewing machine brand 'USHA' in its trademark infringement suit against Haseen Ahmed Training as TUSHA Sewing Machine Co. for using a deceptively similar mark 'TUSHA' in respect of the same work.
A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Navin Chawla granted an ad-interim injunction against Haseen Ahmed Training as TUSHA Sewing Machine Co. in a trademark infringement suit filed by the well-known sewing machine brand 'USHA'.
The Court opined that the marks USHA and TUSHA appeared to be deceptively similar and that Usha International Ltd had shown its goodwill and reputation in its mark 'USHA' and also affirmed that it had been zealously protecting it.
The plaintiff had registered the trademark 'USHA' in 1936 and had been using it since then in relation to sewing machines and their parts.
It was further contended that Usha International Limited that the adoption of the mark 'TUSHA,' came to their attention in the first week of March 2022, following which on March 21, 2022, Usha served a cease-and-desist notice on the defendant, Haseen Ahmed Trading as TUSHA Sewing Machine Co.
The defendants on the other hand claimed that their mark was registered in September 2020 for sewing machines and their parts (except needles).
Usha claimed that the defendants applied for the registration on the 'proposed to be used' basis, and were granted registration during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Placing reliance on the Delhi High Court in Dr.Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. vs. Controller General of Patent Designs & Trade Marks, the registration of the said mark, on the opposition being filed by the plaintiff, is deemed to have been suspended.
Usha alleged that the defendant's use of the mark was dishonest and intended only to capitalize on its reputation. It was also contended that the mark 'USHA' had been declared as a 'well-known trademark' under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in Usha Rani v. Registrar of Trade Marks and Anr (2004).
A Local Commissioner, Advocate Deeksha Khurana of Tis Hazari Court, was appointed by the Court to visit the defendants' premises and take stock of and inventories of all products, as well as confiscate and release all products on superdaari to the defendants.
The Court also ordered that if required, the Local Commissioner may seek police assistance and protection to carry out the order and directed the SHO of concerned areas to provide immediate assistance to the Local Commissioner upon request.
