J.R. Kapoor Vs. Micronix India
1994 Supp (3) SCC 215
Respondent as well as the Appellant manufactured and sold various electrical and electronic goods. Respondent filed a suit for injunction against the use of the trade name ‘MICROTEL’, the logo ‘M’ and the Packing carton on the ground that the same is similar to it’s mark/trade name ‘MICRONIX’, it’s ‘M’ logo. Single Judge granted the injunction and the Division Bench dismissed the appeal. Appellant was injuncted from using the trade mark ‘MICROTEL, the logo ‘M’ and the carton for manufacturing and selling his products which consist of electrical and electronic apparatus, instruments, TV boosters and TV tuners.
Observations of the Supreme Court:
Appellant was not manufacturing any one product such as the boosters. He was producing various electrical and electronic apparatus in many of which micro-chip technology is used. Even the boosters which he manufactures and sells are of two types, viz., transistorized boosters and Integrated Circuit boosters whereas the respondent-plaintiff manufacturers aerial boosters only of the first type. Thus micro-chip technology being the base of many of the products, the word ‘micro’ has much relevance in describing the products. Further, the word ‘micro’ being descriptive of the micro technology used for production of many electronic goods which daily come to the market, no one can claim monopoly over the use of the said word. Anyone producing any product with the use of micro chip technology would be justified in using the said word as a prefix to his trade name.
The visual impression of the said two trade names is indifferent.
This being the case, we are of the view that there is not even the remotest chance of the buyers and users being misguided or confused by the two trade names and logos.
The appeal was allowed and the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was set aside.