Recently, the Delhi High Court while addressing a trademark infringement matter, restrained a rival sweetshop from using the name “JV Evergreen Sweets & Treats” or a deceptively similar logo, citing a likelihood of consumer confusion. The Court observed that the unauthorised use of an identical name could mislead customers and harm the goodwill of a well-established business.
Evergreen Sweet House, a reputed confectionery located in Green Park, Delhi, initiated legal action against JV Evergreen Sweets & Treats, a newer sweetshop operating in Lajpat Nagar. The plaintiff contended that the defendant’s use of the name “Evergreen” and a similar logo was causing confusion among customers, both offline and online. Evergreen Sweet House, with a legacy spanning over 60 years, argued that the defendant’s actions amounted to passing off, potentially damaging its longstanding reputation.
The counsel for Evergreen Sweet House argued that the use of the name “Evergreen” by the defendant was deliberate and aimed at capitalizing on the goodwill and market recognition of the plaintiff’s brand. It was contended that the similarity in names and logos was misleading customers into believing that the defendant's business was associated with the plaintiff. The plaintiff further highlighted how the confusion extended to online platforms like Zomato and Swiggy, where both businesses appeared under similar listings, exacerbating consumer deception.
Justice Amit Bansal, in the interim order, observed, “There is a very real likelihood of the customers being misled into believing that the outlet operated by the defendant has some association with the plaintiff.” The Court noted that online food delivery platforms like Zomato and Swiggy have become significant in modern commerce, and the concurrent listing of both entities under similar names heightened the risk of consumer confusion. The Court further stated, “If any unsuspecting consumer is to search for ‘Evergreen’ on these platforms, both the outlets of the plaintiff and the defendant would show up. Therefore, there is a prima facie likelihood of confusion and deception among the public.”
Additionally, the Court pointed out that the defendant failed to provide any plausible explanation for adopting the name “Evergreen”. Justice Amit Bansal remarked, “In my prima facie view, the adoption of the mark ‘Evergreen’ by the defendant was not bona fide and amounts to misrepresentation.”
Concluding that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case of passing off, the Court restrained the defendant, its partners, and agents from using the name “JV Evergreen Sweets & Treats” or any other deceptively similar mark, trade dress, or logo. The Court also directed food delivery platforms to delist the defendant’s business if it failed to remove its listings voluntarily. Justice Bansal emphasised the importance of protecting businesses from such deceptive practices to preserve their reputation and customer trust.
Picture Source :
