The Supreme Court has declined to intervene in a trademark infringement dispute between Blinkit and Blinkhit, two Bangalore-based startups, thereby upholding the relief granted to e-commerce grocery delivery service Blinkit by the Karnataka High Court.
In a recent hearing, a Bench consisting of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti observed that Blinkhit, the appellant, lacked any recorded turnover as indicated in the case files.
Justice Khanna remarked, "You have zero turnovers. I went through the files, you did not even mention your financials. Sorry."
The dispute centred around a trademark infringement suit filed by Blinkhit against Blinkit, which is owned by Zomato. Blinkit had sought protection against a trial court's temporary injunction that restrained it from infringing Blinkhit's trademark. The appellant contended that the interim injunction was unjust as the respondents had concealed facts. They argued that mere registration of a trademark without actual use should not warrant such an injunction, especially when the activities of the two companies were distinctly different.
The Karnataka High Court, in its April 17 order, had ruled in favour of Blinkit. Justice SR Krishna Kumar, presiding over the case, determined that the services provided by the two parties were unrelated and that obtaining a trademark solely for an entirely different business activity could not serve as the basis for granting a temporary injunction. The court also took into account that Blinkhit had not utilized its registered trademark between 2016 and the filing of the lawsuit before the trial court.
In the Supreme Court appeal, the Bench upheld the High Court's decision, stating that they were disinclined to interfere with the ruling. Consequently, the appeal by Blinkhit was dismissed. This decision has implications for the ongoing trademark dispute between the two startups and reinforces the significance of actual usage and the nature of business activities in trademark infringement cases.
Source: Link
Picture Source :
