"Unwary Customers Can Be Easily Deceived": Delhi HC Restrains Manufacturer From Using CRAX 'CURLS' Trademark In Producing Corn Based Snack

The Delhi High Court has restrained a manufacturer from using CRAX 'CURLS' trademark in producing and selling its corn based snack product, observing that unwary customers can be easily deceived as the goods were sold on low price in small shops.

Justice Navin Chawla observed that the mark 'Kurvy' as well as the packaging adopted by the manufacturer prima facie appeared to be deceptively similar to Crax's trademark 'CURLS'.

Crax had approached the Court by way of filing a trademark infringement suit claiming that it had launched its product 'CURLS' in December, 2016, followed by a nation-wide launch in March 2017.

It was also claimed that between the years 2016 to 2021, the sales had grown tremendously and sales figure from 2020 to 2021 were to the tune of Rs.14985.58 Lakhs. It was the plaintiff's case that it was the registered proprietor of the trade marks 'CRAX CURLS' and 'CURLS'.

Crax was aggrieved by the adoption of the identical mark as also the trade dress of the corn-based snack items by the defendants. It was stated that though the defendants had claimed that they had stopped the using the previous packaging (using Curls mark) and adopted a new packaging with a new trademark (KURVY), however, the new mark and the packaging was also deceptively-similar to that of Crax.

"Having heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff, perused the plaint and the documents filed therewith, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has been able to make out a good prima facie case in its favour. The marks and the packaging prima facie appears to be deceptively similar," the Court observed.

It added "The goods being of low monetary value and being sold over the counter of grocery stores, as also other small shops, the attention span of an average consumer is low and such unwary consumer can be easily deceived."

The matter has now been listed for November 22.

Title: DFM FOODS LIMITED v. CHANDEL STORE & ORS.

Click Here To Read Order