Recently, the Delhi High Court in an appeal before it, upheld the decision of the lower court opining existence of a prima facie case of infringement on the basis of the word CENTURY being prominent in the rival marks SHIVAM CENTURY and CP CENTURY.
It was the case of the respondent that the appellant’s mark is similar to its mark phonetically, visually and structurally. It was the claim of the appellant that the word CENTURY is a descriptive word thus, no monopoly can be claimed on such a word. The appellant also claimed that the word CENTURY is used by many other brands/companies in the same business as that of the appellant. Lastly the appellant asserted that the fonts and styles used in the rival marks are distinctive and therefore the marks are distinguishable.
The lower court while coming to the prima facie conclusion that the appellant had infringed the respondent’s trademark, opined that the appellant has failed to substantiate its claim that the word CENTURY is commonly associated with modular kitchens. The court noted that although the term CENTURY has a dictionary meaning, since the respondent has a registration, and is the prior user, it has the right to protect its mark.
The Delhi High Court while dismissing the appeal reiterated that the word CENTURY forms the most prominent part of the rival marks and therefore the court cannot accept the contention that the prima facie conclusion that the trademarks used by the appellant are likely to cause confusion as to source warrants any interference.
Ms. Shivam Hardware Store Vs Ms. Century World FAO(COMM) 102/2022