In Kent RO Systems Limited & Ors. v. Kent Cables Private Limited & Ors., the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court declined to interfere with the order of the Single Judge Bench restraining Kent RO Systems Limited from manufacturing and selling fans under the trademark “KENT”, holding that Kent Cables Private Limited had established prior use and goodwill in relation to fans and allied electrical goods.
The dispute arose from competing claims over the use of the trademark “KENT” in the electrical goods market. Kent RO Systems Limited, widely known for its water purifiers and home appliances sold under the trademark “KENT”, proposed to expand its product range by launching fans and other electrical products under the same mark.
Kent Cables Private Limited opposed the proposed launch and contended that it had been using the mark “KENT” since 1984 in relation to electrical goods including wires, cables, switches and fans. It was asserted that the mark had acquired substantial goodwill and reputation in the electrical goods segment through continuous commercial use.
The controversy eventually resulted in cross suits between the parties, with Kent RO seeking to restrain Kent Cables from using the mark “KENT” for electrical goods, while Kent Cables sought an injunction restraining Kent RO from launching fans under the identical mark.
The High Court examined the rival claims in the context of the principles governing prior user and passing off under trademark law while considering the challenge to the order passed by the Single Judge. Upon consideration of the material placed on record, the Hon’ble Court made the following observations:
Kent Cables had prima facie demonstrated prior adoption and use of the mark “KENT” in relation to electrical goods.
The respondents had been selling fans under the mark for several years and had built goodwill in that segment.
Kent RO Systems was aware of the respondents’ use of the mark for fans since at least 2011 but had not taken timely steps to restrain such use.
Permitting Kent RO to manufacture and sell fans under the identical mark was likely to cause confusion among consumers in the market.
In view of the above findings, the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court declined to interfere with the order of the Single Judge and the restraint on Kent RO Systems Limited from manufacturing and selling fans under the trademark “KENT” during the pendency of the suit continued to operate.
The judgment reiterates that in trademark law, prior use and established goodwill in a particular product segment may prevail over subsequent expansion of a brand into the same market, particularly where such expansion is likely to cause consumer confusion.
