Puma Se v. K.Srinivasan Trading as K.Srinivasan Mills & The Registrar of Trade Marks

(T)OP(TM)/518/2023 (ORA/SR.3/2021/TM/CHN)

The Madras High Court allowed Puma Se's petition for rectification, directing the removal of a conflicting trade mark registration (No. 2892343) held by K.Srinivasan Mills. The court found that the leaping cat depicted in the respondent's label bore a strong resemblance to Puma's registered 'leaping puma' logo. This ruling reinforces the principle that established trademark proprietors are entitled to protect their distinctive logos against confusingly similar marks, even if those marks operate in related classes.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
(T)OP(TM)/518/2023 (ORA/SR.3/2021/TM/CHN)
Judge(s)
N.Seshasayee

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Puma Se vs K.Srinivasan Trading as K.Srinivasan Mills & The Registrar of Trade Marks is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkCS (Comm.) No. 41/2023

Apollo Pipes LtdvsNirmal Polymers

Apollo Pipes Ltd filed a commercial suit seeking permanent injunction against Nirmal Polymers for infringing its well-known trademarks ('APOLLO', 'APL APOLLO'). The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was using deceptively similar marks like 'A ONE APOLLO' in relation to PVC pipes and building material products, causing financial loss and damaging goodwill. The court passed an ex-parte decree in favor of Apollo Pipes Ltd.

trademark(T)OP(TM)/236/2023

ITC LimitedvsVST Industries Limited

The Madras High Court allowed ITC Limited's petition seeking rectification of a trademark registration. The court directed the removal of Trademark No. 509304 from Class 34 on the Register of Trademarks. This decision was made after VST Industries Limited filed a memo indicating no objection to the petitioner's request, effectively clearing the path for the cancellation.

trademark(T)CMA(TM).No.93 of 2023

Dhanvantari Nano Ayushadi Private LimitedvsThe Registrar of Trade Marks

Dhanvantari Nano Ayushadi Private Limited filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking to set aside an order passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks concerning the registration of the mark “NANO CUR”. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution because the appellant could not be served notice due to having vacated the specified office address.

trademarkC.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 165/2023

Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd & Anr.vsD N Bahri Trading As The Veldon Chemical And Food Product And Anr.

The Delhi High Court allowed a rectification petition filed by Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd against D N Bahri Trading As The Veldon Chemical, ordering the removal of the respondent's registered mark under Class 32. The petitioner successfully argued that the impugned trademark was either not used continuously for the required period or constituted an infringement/passing off risk given the established reputation and extensive use of the 'AMUL' brand. This judgment reinforces the protection afforded to well-known marks against unauthorized registrations.

trademarkC.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 29/2024, I.A. 3740/2024, I.A. 3741/2024

Chestnut Heights Resorts Pvt. Ltd.vsNandini Lall & Anr.

The Delhi High Court addressed multiple rectification petitions filed by Chestnut Heights Resorts Pvt. Ltd. against Nandini Lall & Anr., seeking cancellation of the 'JILLING' trademarks. Recognizing that these new petitions dealt with the same set of marks already under consideration in another proceeding, the court opted for judicial efficiency. The bench ordered the consolidation of all related matters to be heard together before a specific judge.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Facing a trademark dispute?

Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.

Talk to our TM team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar trademark matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call