Carrefour v. V. Subburaman 2007(35) PTC 225:

FACTS:

The plaintiff was proprietor of trademark ‘Carrefour’ which was registered in India in respect of a variety of products but not furniture: The defendant started using the same mark, but for furniture: The plaintiff filed a case for injunction:

ISSUE:

Is there infringement on the plaintiff’s mark even though it was not registered for furniture in India?:

HELD:

The plaintiff had goodwill and reputation in several countries: They had over 2500 registrations of this mark over a variety of products including furniture: AND they had obtained registration of this TM in India since 1995: The defendant had no explanation for why they chose to use this TM: Hence the public was likely to be deceived as the plaintiff’s company covered a variety of goods spanning across multiple nations and it would be easily believable that the defendant’s goods were also related to the plaintiff’s company:

Video Summary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhhBAABxhG0&list=PL1DBVyVi7EaCojbQa5_XKBVJqA1y1REh&index=3