https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91705 The SC dismissed the appeal and refused interim relief, holding that the defendant's mark is not deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' well-known registered marks. Applying the anti-dissection rule, dominant-feature analysis and the average-consumer (imperfect recollection) test, the Court found the common laudatory term to be non-distinctive and not monopolizable absent cogent evidence of acquired distinctiveness. Differences in trade dress, label design, packaging, typography and overall commercial impression negated a real likelihood of confusion or passing off. The judgment was confined to the interlocutory stage; the Commercial Court was directed to try and dispose of the suit on merits within four months. en-us Wed, 20 Aug 2025 08:34:41 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2025 08:34:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91705 The SC dismissed the appeal and refused interim relief, holding that the defendant's mark is not deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' well-known registered marks. Applying the anti-dissection rule, dominant-feature analysis and the average-consumer (imperfect recollection) test, the Court found the common laudatory term to be non-distinctive and not monopolizable absent cogent evidence of acquired distinctiveness. Differences in trade dress, label design, packaging, typography and overall commercial impression negated a real likelihood of confusion or passing off. The judgment was confined to the interlocutory stage; the Commercial Court was directed to try and dispose of the suit on merits within four months. Highlights Indian Laws Wed, 20 Aug 2025 08:34:41 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91705