Gucci moves Delhi Court against trademark infringement, gets permanent injunction restraining use of its logo [Read Order]

Global luxury giant Gucci obtained an ex-parte reprieve from a Delhi Court, which restrained a local manufacturer from using the brand’s iconic logo on its products [Guccio Gucci SPA v. Intiyaz Sheikh]..The Florence-based fashion house had moved the Court of District Judge Bharat Parashar seeking a permanent injunction on the use of its logo by Intiyaz Sheikh of Shipra Overseas, a company based in Delhi.The Court not only passed a permanent injunction in Gucci’s favour, but also directed the defendant to cough up ₹2 lakh in damages and ₹1.66 lakh as costs..Gucci sought a permanent injunction against the defendant and its agents and stockiest from manufacturing, trading, selling, supplying, marketing, offering for sale or dealing in any other way, any goods including socks, tags/labels and its packaging material and/ or any other goods and accessories, etc, under the mark “GUCCI.”The brand’s suit alleged that its trademark and copyright were infringed upon by way of the socks manufactured by the defendant. The defendant, it alleged, was illegally manufacturing the products using its registered trademark and logo that had been extensively accepted the world over as a “quality and standard product”..It also came record that in April, 2019, during a market survey, Gucci’s field representatives found that the defendant was manufacturing, stocking and offering large quantities of counterfeit products including socks and packaging material under the plaintiff's well-known “green and red stripes” logo and mark “GUCCI.”The plaintiff’s representatives thereafter procured pictures of the defendant’s products and the packaging material and found that he had copied the plaintiff's “well-known green and red stripes” logo and mark “GUCCI” in the entirety..Gucci thus moved court, arguing that the subject matter of the suit was commercial in nature as defined under Section 2(1)(c) of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Its counsel submitted that there was no legal impediment in the suit that could prohibit decreeing the suit in its favour..It also claimed to have extensively advertised its products bearing the distinctive mark “GUCCI” and its logo through media, newspapers, magazines, internet and trade journals distributed all over the world including India.Therefore, due to its long standing and extensive usage and massive popularity since it came into existence in the year 1921, the “GUCCI” mark was stated to be synonymous with luxury fashion wear. Due to its popularity throughout the world including India, GUCCI's sales figures were stated to be substantial, running into several millions Euros each year..When it came to the defendant’s side, his non-appearance prompted Judge Parashar to say, “It is clear that defendant deliberately chose not to participate in the present proceedings despite having due knowledge of the pendency of the present suit.”.After examining the evidence, the Court observed, “I do not find any reason to disbelieve the claim of plaintiff either as regard user of its mark ‘GUCCI’ and logo since long and also registration of its mark in India. I have also no reason to disbelieve that plaintiff company has acquired very high goodwill, exclusivity, distinctiveness and unique identity with respect to the products manufactured by it carrying the impugned mark and logo.”.The Court further directed that all the infringing goods from the premises of defendant be handed over to the plaintiff and destroyed.Noting that the defendant was “certainly liable” to pay damages to the plaintiff, the Court awarded ₹2 lakh in the latter’s favour in addition to ₹1.66 lakh as costs.Advocate Shashi P Ojha represented Gucci..[Read Order]