In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court upheld the registration of the trademark "Harpic Drainxpert" in favour of household goods manufacturer Reckitt and Colman observing the way in which Reckitt employs the disputed mark "Harpic Drainexpert" on its packaging. The court noted that it's evident that there is minimal possibility for any consumer to become perplexed between Reckitt’s and the petitioner's marks.
Brief Facts:
The case revolved around a dispute concerning the registration of the trademark "HARPIC DRAINXPERT." The trademark had been registered on behalf of Reckitt and Colman, a manufacturer of household products. RSPL Health Private Limited, a company involved in the production of similar items under the brand 'Xpert', had filed appeals with the aim of rectifying the Trademark Register by removing the "Harpic Drainxpert" mark.
Contentions of the Parties:
RSPL Health, the appellant, had argued that the "HARPIC DRAINXPERT" trademark bore similarities to their 'Xpert' mark and was used for comparable goods and services. They had asserted that such resemblance was likely to lead to confusion among the general public and could potentially establish an association between the two marks. RSPL had further contended that the registration of the disputed marks should not have been allowed under the relevant sections of the Trade Marks Act.
Reckitt and Colman, the respondent, had maintained that their use of the "HARPIC DRAINXPERT" mark would not cause confusion with RSPL's 'Xpert' mark. They had put forth the argument that the marks had distinct visual differences, with the term "HARPIC" being the predominant and distinguishing element of their mark. Reckitt also highlighted that the packaging prominently displayed the "HARPIC DRAINXPERT" mark, thus minimizing any likelihood of confusion.
Observations by the Court:
Justice C Hari Shankar, presiding over the case, stated that the way Reckitt uses the "Harpic Drainxpert" mark on its products eliminates any confusion between the two marks. He pointed out that the eye is drawn to the prominent "HARPIC" part of the mark, which is positioned above the "DRAINXPERT" part, making it unlikely for customers to confuse the two.
While acknowledging that RSPL's trademarks pre-date Reckitt's applications, the court emphasized that the mere fact that the rival marks cover similar goods or services does not necessarily invalidate later registrations. Justice Shankar noted that considering the mark "Harpic Drainxpert" as similar to "Xpert" would stretch the principle of similarity unreasonably, as "XPERT" is only part of the second word of the "Harpic Drainxpert" mark.
“The principle of similarity is not so elastic as to be stretched to breaking point. “XPERT” is only half of the second word of Respondent 1’s impugned registered word mark, which is “DRAINXPERT”. It is only, therefore, if one were to ignore “HARPIC”, bifurcate the second word of the impugned mark into “DRAIN” and “XPERT”, and ignore the first of the said two parts “DRAIN” that the petitioner’s mark and Respondent 1’s mark would become alike.”
The decision of the Court:
The court held that treating the mark “Harpic Drainxpert” as similar to the mark “Xpert” would be stretching the principle of similarity to an unreasonable extent.
Case Name: M/s RSPL Health Private Limited vs. Reckitt And Colman (Overseas) Hygiene Home Limited & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr Justice C Hari Shankar
Case No.: C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 93/2023 & I.A. 3943/2023
Advocates of the Petitioners: Mr. Rishi Bansal, Mr. Mankaran Singh, Ms. Sugandha Yadav and Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advs.
Advocates of the Respondent: Mr. Chander Mohan Lall, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Nancy Roy, Ms. Prakriti Varshney, Ms. Aastha Kakkar, Mr. Prashant, Ms. Yashi Agrawal, Ms. Nida Khanam and Ms. Ananya Chug, Advs. for R-1 Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC and Mr. Kushagra Kumar, GP for UOI
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
