Court restrains Imperia Decor Industries from using "ALUMAC" mark in Aluminium Composite Panels, citing phonetic and visual similarity with plaintiff's registered "ALOMAX" trademark and prior association of defendant's director with plaintiff
In a significant ruling dated October 7, 2026, the Delhi High Court, presided by Justice Vikas Mahajan, granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of Alucopanel Industries, restraining Imperia Decor Industries and its associates from using the trademark "ALUMAC" or any deceptively similar mark in relation to Aluminium Composite Panels and other building and construction materials. The Court found the defendants' mark to be phonetically and visually deceptive, likely to cause confusion with the plaintiff's well-established and registered trademark "ALOMAX."
Alucopanel Industries, the plaintiff, is a registered partnership firm engaged in the manufacture, marketing, and sale of Aluminium Composite Panels and related building materials. The plaintiff has been using the trademark "ALOMAX" since 2000 and holds multiple registrations for the mark across several classes, including Class 6 and Class 19, which cover the relevant goods. The Court noted that the plaintiff's mark has acquired substantial goodwill and reputation nationwide, backed by extensive sales turnover exceeding crores annually from 2009-10 to 2024-25.
The dispute arose when the plaintiff discovered that the defendants were using the mark "ALUMAC" for similar goods. Notably, one of the directors of the defendant company was previously associated with the plaintiff firm, which the Court considered evidence of non-bona fide adoption of the impugned mark. The Court emphasized that the marks "ALOMAX" and "ALUMAC" are deceptively similar both visually and phonetically, and given the similarity of goods and the profile of primary purchasers (often illiterate or semi-literate), the defendants' mark was likely to mislead consumers and cause confusion in the marketplace.
The Court also rejected the defendants' potential defense regarding pre-litigation mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, granting exemption to the plaintiff due to the urgency of the relief sought.
Consequently, the Court restrained the defendants, including their agents, partners, and representatives, from using the "ALUMAC" mark or any confusingly similar mark till the next date of hearing. The defendants have been directed to file a reply within four weeks, and the matter is listed for further hearing on February 2, 2027.
This ruling reinforces the importance of protecting registered trademarks and the principle that adoption of deceptively similar marks, especially with prior knowledge or association, will not be tolerated under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Bottom Line:
Trade Marks Act - Infringement and passing off - Plaintiff, prior adopter and registered proprietor of trademark "ALOMAX", granted ex parte ad interim injunction against defendants' use of deceptively similar mark "ALUMAC" in respect of similar goods, namely Aluminium Composite Panels and building and construction materials - Court held that marks were phonetically and visually deceptively similar and adoption by defendants was not bona fide, particularly as one of directors of defendant company was previously associated with plaintiff firm.
Statutory provision(s):
Trade Marks Act, 1999, Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2, Section 151 CPC), Trade Marks Act Sections on Infringement and Passing Off
Alucopanel Industries v. Imperia Decor Industries, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2995546
