Court holds that Respondent's "LNK" mark infringes Petitioner's well-established "L&K Waterman Since 1948" device mark under Section 11(1)(b) of Trade Marks Act, 1999, causing likelihood of confusion in identical sanitary products
In a significant ruling dated September 3, 2026, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Jyoti Singh, ordered the cancellation of the trademark registration bearing No. 3373300 for the word mark "LNK" in Class 11, owned by Shakti Hydraulic Engineers. The Court found that the mark "LNK" was deceptively similar to the Petitioner Basant Lal's earlier registered device marks containing "L&K," which have been extensively used since 1948 for sanitary products including metal taps and bathroom fittings.
The Petitioner, Basant Lal, approached the Court under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking cancellation of the Respondent's trademark on the grounds that it violated Section 11(1)(b) of the Act by creating a likelihood of confusion or deception among consumers. Basant Lal's trademark "L & K Waterman Since 1948" is a well-known device mark with registrations dating back to 2005 and a business legacy spanning over seven decades, establishing significant goodwill and reputation in the sanitaryware market.
The Court noted that although the Petitioner's mark is a device mark registered as a whole, the dominant element "L&K" was a distinctive and recognizable part of the mark. The Respondent's mark "LNK," registered in 2016, bore strong visual and phonetic similarity to "L&K," particularly when applied to identical goods in Class 11. This similarity was held to be sufficient to cause confusion or deception among consumers, violating the provisions of the Trade Marks Act.
Despite service of notice, Respondent No. 1 failed to appear and contest the petition, leading the Court to proceed ex parte and accept the Petitioner's claims as admitted. The Registrar of Trade Marks, represented by the CGSC, contended that the device mark must be viewed as a whole and that the Petitioner could not claim exclusive rights to the letters "L&K" separately. However, the Court found that the dominant portion test, as endorsed by previous decisions of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, justified focusing on "L&K" as a critical element in assessing similarity.
The Court further emphasized the extensive advertising, brand endorsements, and social media presence enjoyed by the Petitioner's marks, reinforcing the established goodwill. It held that the Respondent's registration of "LNK" infringed the Petitioner's prior rights and ordered that the impugned registration be cancelled. The Registrar of Trade Marks was directed to remove the entry of the "LNK" mark from the Register within eight weeks to maintain the integrity of the trademark register.
This decision reaffirms the principle that trademarks must not only be distinct in their entirety but also in their dominant features, particularly when applied to identical or similar goods, to prevent consumer confusion and protect established brand reputations.
Bottom Line:
Trademark Law - Cancellation of Trademark registration - A trademark registration can be cancelled if it violates Section 11(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, by creating a likelihood of confusion or deception due to visual or phonetic similarity with an earlier registered trademark, especially when the rival goods are identical.
Statutory provision(s):
Trade Marks Act, 1999 Sections 11(1)(b), 47, 57
Basant Lal v. Shakti Hydraulic Engineers, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2980740
