In a fast-evolving marketplace like India, brand identity is one of a company’s most valuable assets. With increasing competition and a surge in digital commerce, trademarks have become critical for distinguishing goods and services. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 governs trademark law in India, offering both civil and criminal remedies against infringement. Recent years have seen a rise in trademark litigation, driven by digital misuse, brand dilution, and increasing awareness among rights holders.
This article explores recent trends in trademark infringement in India and discusses key judgments that have shaped the enforcement landscape.
Understanding Trademark Infringement under Indian Law
Trademark infringement occurs when a party uses a mark that is identical or deceptively similar to a registered trademark, without authorization, in a manner that is likely to cause confusion or deceive the public.
Under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, infringement is established when:
-
- The infringing mark is identical or similar to a registered trademark.
-
- The infringing goods/services are identical or similar.
-
- The use causes a likelihood of confusion or association.
It is distinct from passing off, which is a common law remedy protecting unregistered marks based on goodwill and reputation.
This blog is a part of our The Ultimate Guide to Intellectual Property Law blogpost.
Recent Trends in Trademark Infringement in India
Spread of Online Infringement
The rise of e-commerce and social media platforms has led to increased instances of digital trademark infringement, including:
-
-
- Unauthorized use of brand names in domain names and social handles.
- Sale of counterfeit goods on online marketplaces.
- Use of misleading advertisements and sponsored listings.
-
Example: Several fashion and electronics brands have sued resellers and platforms for hosting counterfeit or deceptively branded products.
Rise in Interim Injunctions and Ex Parte Relief
Courts are more frequently granting interim and ex parte injunctions to prevent irreparable damage during the early stages of litigation. This reflects a shift towards protecting IP rights swiftly, especially in cases involving fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), pharmaceuticals, and tech.
Example: In pharma disputes, courts have restrained competitors from launching infringing drugs within days of suit filing.
Protection of Transborder Reputation
Indian courts have consistently upheld the rights of foreign brands with reputation in India, even in the absence of physical presence.
Example: In Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha v. Prius Auto Industries Ltd. (2017), the Supreme Court recognized the need for proving reputation within Indian territory, setting a nuanced standard for transborder reputation.
Enforcement through Customs and Border Measures
Rights holders can record their trademarks with Indian Customs to prevent import/export of counterfeit goods. This administrative remedy is gaining traction among luxury and consumer brands.
Notable Judgments in Recent Years
PhonePe Pvt. Ltd. v. BharatPe (Delhi High Court, 2021)
Issue: Whether the use of the suffix “Pe” by BharatPe infringed PhonePe’s registered trademark.
Ruling: The court held that the mere use of “Pe” does not establish confusion unless distinctiveness and brand association are proven. The suit emphasized the need for a holistic view of consumer perception.
Significance: This case clarified that trademark protection does not extend automatically to parts or syllables of a mark unless those elements have acquired distinctiveness.
Christian Louboutin SAS v. Mr. Pawan Kumar (2022)
Issue: Unauthorized use of the famous red sole on women’s footwear.
Ruling: The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of single-color trademarks and granted a permanent injunction in favor of Louboutin.
Significance: It reinforced protection for non-traditional marks, recognizing visual branding elements beyond words and logos.
Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Hakunamatata Tata Founders (2022)
Issue: Use of the mark “Tata” by an unrelated business entity.
Ruling: The Bombay High Court held that the use of the “Tata” name, despite different industries, was misleading due to its widespread reputation.
Significance: The case demonstrates how Indian courts uphold reputation-based protection, especially for family or legacy brands.
Marico Ltd. v. Abhijeet Bhansali (Bombay High Court, 2020)
Issue: A YouTube influencer made negative remarks about Marico’s Parachute Coconut Oil brand.
Ruling: The court balanced trademark rights and free speech, ultimately allowing critical commentary but emphasizing that influencers must avoid false or misleading statements.
Significance: A landmark judgment on the intersection of IP and digital content, particularly influencer speech.
Civil, Criminal, and Administrative Enforcement in India
India offers a wide range of remedies to trademark owners:
Civil Remedies
-
-
- Injunctions (interim, permanent).
-
-
-
- Damages or account of profits.
-
-
-
- Delivery/destruction of infringing goods.
-
-
-
- Anton Piller and John Doe orders (for raids and unidentified defendants).
-
Criminal Remedies
-
-
- Penalties include imprisonment (up to 3 years) and fines (up to ₹2 lakh).
-
-
-
- Applicable especially in counterfeiting cases.
-
Administrative Measures
-
-
- Recordation with Indian Customs (ICED portal).
-
-
-
- Domain name dispute resolution via .IN Registry’s INDRP.
-
-
-
- Opposition or rectification before the Trade Marks Registry.
-
Challenges in Enforcement
Despite strong legal provisions, enforcement faces hurdles:
-
- Delayed Trials: Trademark suits often take years for final resolution.
-
- Proving Confusion: In many cases, actual market confusion is difficult to establish.
-
- Online Infringement: Platforms are not always quick to respond, especially when hosted outside India.
-
- Low Awareness: Small and medium businesses often do not monitor infringement actively.
Best Practices for Rights Holders
-
- Monitor: Regularly track online and offline usage of your marks.
-
- Register: Ensure all relevant marks (word, logo, sound, etc.) are properly registered.
-
- Act Quickly: Infringement should be addressed promptly to secure interim relief.
Navigating the Future of Trademark Protection in India
Trademark law in India continues to evolve dynamically, shaped by judicial interpretations, global trade influences, and the rise of digital commerce. Indian courts have demonstrated a robust approach in safeguarding trademark rights, especially in cases involving deceptive similarity, transborder reputation, and dilution of well-known marks.
The proliferation of e-commerce platforms, cross-border brand engagement, and the growing role of social media and influencer marketing have introduced new dimensions to trademark infringement. This has compelled courts and businesses alike to adapt rapidly to emerging challenges, including misuse of marks in sponsored content, domain squatting, and unauthorized use in digital advertisements.
For businesses operating in or entering the Indian market, this environment underscores the importance of a proactive IP strategy. Regular trademark audits, swift enforcement actions, and comprehensive monitoring of digital channels are no longer optional—they are essential tools in brand protection.
As India continues to harmonize its IP regime with international standards, businesses must remain informed and agile. Staying ahead of evolving legal interpretations and leveraging technology for enforcement will be key to ensuring that their trademarks remain valuable, enforceable assets in a competitive marketplace.
