PARLE PRODUCTS (P) LTD. versus J. P. & CO. MYSORE

Citation: [1972] 3 S.C.R. 289 · Decided: 28-01-1972 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.K. MITTER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

B 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
PARLE PRODUCTS (P) LTD. 
v. 
J. P. & CO. MYSORE 
January 28, 1972 
289 
[C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, I. D. DUA AND G. K. MITTER, JI.] 
Trade 
and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, s. 2(d)-'Deceptivel.v 
si111i/ar'-Proper approach by court for deter111ining if one 1nark is decep-
tirely sin1ilar to another. 
The appellants filed a suit for an injunction restraining the respondents 
from infringing their registered trade mark used on packets of bi>cliits 
manufactured by them.. The suit was dismissed by the trial. court and 
the High Court. 
Allowing the appeal to this Court, 
HELD: (I) Under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, a 
registe'red trade mark is infringed by a person who uses, in the course of 
trade, a mark which is identical with or deceptively similar to, the trade 
mark, in relation to any ~oodS in respect of which the trade mark is 
registered; and the expression 'deceptively similar' means a mark which 
so nearly resembles another mark as likely to deceive or cau~ confusion. 
Jn order to come to the conclusion whether one mark is deceptively 
similar to another the broad end es·senti(ll features of the two arc to be 
considered. . They should not be pla~ed side by side to find out if there 
are any dif!erenc~ in the design, and if so, whether they a~ of such 
character as to prevent one d .. ign from being mistaken for the other. Jt 
would be enough if the. impugned mark bears such on overall .similarity 
to the registered mark as would be likely to mislead a person usually 
doaling with one to accept the othe'r if offered to him. [292 B-D; 294 D·FJ 
In this case, the packets of biscuits manufactured by ihe appellants and 
respondents were practically of the same size, the colour scheme of tho 
two wrappers was almost the same, and the designs on both, though not 
identical, bore such a close resemblance that one ci:>uld easily be mistaken 
for the other. If one was not careful enough to note the peculiar featurea 
of the wrapper on the phintiffs' goods, he might easily mistake the 
Jefendants' wrapper for the plaintiffs' if shown to him some time after 
he had seen the plaintiffs' wrapper. Though the trial court and the High 
. Court had concurrently lound that the defendants' wrapper was not decep-
tively similar to thot of the plaintiffs, the finding must be set aside as it 
11'0s not arrived at on a proper consideration of the Jaw. [294 F-Hl 
Durga Dutt v. Navaratna Laboratori<S L196S] I S C.R. 737 followod. 
Karly's Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, 9th ed. para 338 
referrid to. 
C1VIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: C.A. No. 1051 of 1967. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated 
July 5, 1966 of the Mysore High Court in Regular First Appeal 
No. 170 of 1963. 
290 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1972] 3 S.C.R. 
S. T. Desai and I. N. Shroff, for the appellant. 
S. K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta, for the respondent. 
The Jud~ent of the Court was delivered by 
Mitter, J. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgml\nt 
of the Mysore High Court confirming the dismissal of a suit for 
an injunction restraining the respondent from infringing the re-
gistered trade mark of the plaintiffs used on packets of biscuits. 
The facts are as follows. 
The plaiJltiffs-appellants before us 
are manufacturers of biscuits and confectionery and are owners 
of certain registered trade marks. One of them is the word 
"Gluco'' used on their half pound biscuit packets. Another re-
gistered trade mark of theirs is a wrapper with its colour scheme, 
general ·set up and entire collocation of words registered under 
the Trade Marks Act 1940 a> No. 9184 of 7th December, 1942. 
This wrapper is used in connection with the sale of their biscuits 
known as "Parle's Gluco Biscuits" printed on the wrapper. The 
wrapper is of buff colour and depicts a farm yard with a girl in 
the centre carrying a pail of water and cows and hens around her 
on the background of a farmyard house and trees. The plaintiffs 
claim that they have been selling their biscuits on an extensive 
scale for many years past under the said trade mark which ac-
quired great reputation. and goodwill among the members of the 
public. 
They claimed to have discovered in March 1961 that 
the defendants were manufacturing, selling and offering for sale 
biscuits in a wrapper which according to them was deceptively• 
similar to their registered trade mark. The plaintiffs assert that 
this act of the defendant constitutes an infringement of their trade 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.