Hawkins Cookers Limited v Murugan Enterprises 2012(50)PTC389(Del):

Decorative shape 3
Decorative shape 4
Decorative shape 5
Hawkins Cookers Limited v Murugan Enterprises 2012(50)PTC389(Del):
FG Lawkit

By FG Lawkit

Hawkins Cookers Limited v Murugan Enterprises 2012(50)PTC389(Del):

Quick answer: what is this case brief about?

Delhi High Court ruled that Murugan's use of 'Suitable for Hawkins' on gaskets was not TM infringement under $§30(2)(d)$, despite undue prominence in marketing:

FACTS:

Hawkins is an established brand with its registered TM in India: Plaintiff sells gaskets (parts of pressure cooker) and uses the terms-’ Suitable for Hawkins Pressue Cookers’ in their marketing: Hawkings filed a case of infringement: Murugan (defendant) takes the defense of Section 30(2)(d) (Exceptions) - A registered TM can be used for parts and accessories:

ISSUE:

Is the defendant using Hawkins as a Trademark?:

HELD:

Single Judge High Court: it is reasonably necessary for the manufacturer of adaptable goods to refer to the TM of the relateable goods- this is not infringement: Division Bench: upheld this decision but added that the defendants had added undue prominence to the word Hawkins by printing it in big bold letters – they had to remove the prominence: Ultimately, the defendants were not infringing upon the TM of the plaintiff:

Video Summary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tazZvmBxCjg&list=PL1DBVyVi7EaCojbQa5_XKBVJqA1y1REh&index=4

Related categories:

Trade Mark

Tags:

Trademark Infringement:Section 30(2)(d):Parts and Accessories:Hawkins:Pressure Cookers:Functional Use:Undue Prominence: