Delhi High Court Cancels Deceptively Similar Trademark 'IMAGE' Registered by Respondent
In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has ordered the cancellation of the trademark 'IMAGE', finding it deceptively similar to the renowned 'CROCS' mark, potentially causing consumer confusion.
In a significant ruling by the Delhi High Court on September 26, 2025, Justice Tejas Karia ordered the cancellation of the trademark 'IMAGE', registered by the second respondent, as it was found to be deceptively similar to the globally recognized 'CROCS' trademark owned by Crocs Inc. The judgment underscored the importance of maintaining the purity of the Trade Marks Register and preventing consumer confusion.
Crocs Inc, a prominent company engaged in the manufacturing and sale of footwear, sought the cancellation of the 'IMAGE' mark under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The company argued that the 'IMAGE' mark, used for similar goods under Class 25, was visually and phonetically similar to their registered 'CROCS' mark. Crocs Inc emphasized that such similarities could mislead consumers into believing an association between the two brands.
The Delhi High Court meticulously examined the evidence presented, including comparisons of the trademarks' visual and phonetic characteristics. The court found a striking resemblance in the placement and overall appearance of the marks, concluding that they were likely to cause confusion among consumers.
The court noted that the 'CROCS' trademark, registered in India since 2005, has garnered significant goodwill and reputation both in India and abroad. Crocs Inc had also highlighted the dishonest adoption of the 'IMAGE' mark by the respondent, suggesting an intent to capitalize on Crocs Inc's established reputation.
Despite the second respondent failing to file any written submissions, their counsel argued that the 'IMAGE' mark was not deceptively similar to 'CROCS'. However, the court dismissed this argument, ruling that the registration of 'IMAGE' infringed upon the provisions of Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, which prohibits the registration of deceptively similar trademarks.
The court directed the Trade Marks Registry to remove the 'IMAGE' mark from the Register of Trade Marks within four weeks, ensuring the registry's integrity and protecting consumer interests. This judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding trademark rights and preventing unfair trade practices.
Bottom Line:
Trade Marks Act - Registration of deceptively similar trade mark - Registration of a trade mark which is deceptively similar to an already registered trade mark can cause confusion among the consumers and is liable to be cancelled.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 11(1)(b), 47, 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999
Crocs Inc v. Registrar of Trademarks New Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2784693
