{"id":10255,"date":"2022-01-15T05:58:51","date_gmt":"2022-01-15T05:58:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/?p=10255"},"modified":"2022-01-15T06:54:51","modified_gmt":"2022-01-15T06:54:51","slug":"trademark-dispute-between-rooh-afza-and-dil-afza","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/trademark-dispute-between-rooh-afza-and-dil-afza\/","title":{"rendered":"Trademark Dispute Between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza \u2013 An Overview"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">The manufacturers of <strong><em>Rooh Afza<\/em><\/strong> filed a lawsuit arguing that their name is identical with sharbat in India and that the name <strong><em>Dil Afza<\/em><\/strong> is deceptively identical to their product. Buying a bottle of sharbat may involve emotions but not to the extent hoped for manufactures of Rooh Afza, the <strong><em>Delhi High Court <\/em><\/strong>said while refusing to pass a provisional order to restrain \u201cDil Afza&#8221; manufacturers from allegedly indulging in <a href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/trademark-infringement\" class=\"text-primary\"><strong>Trademark Infringement<\/strong><\/a>. Scroll down to check more information regarding the Trademark Dispute between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_65 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-light-blue ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<label for=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-item-6a3b09d29b0e8\" class=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-label\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/label><input type=\"checkbox\"  id=\"ez-toc-cssicon-toggle-item-6a3b09d29b0e8\"  aria-label=\"Toggle\" \/><nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/trademark-dispute-between-rooh-afza-and-dil-afza\/#Trademark_War_between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza_%E2%80%93_Background_of_the_Case\" title=\"Trademark War\nbetween Rooh Afza and Dil Afza \u2013 Background of the Case\">Trademark War\nbetween Rooh Afza and Dil Afza \u2013 Background of the Case<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/trademark-dispute-between-rooh-afza-and-dil-afza\/#Cites_Similarities_between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza\" title=\"Cites\nSimilarities between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza\">Cites\nSimilarities between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/trademark-dispute-between-rooh-afza-and-dil-afza\/#Decision_%E2%80%93_Trademark_War_Between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza\" title=\"Decision \u2013 Trademark\nWar Between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza\">Decision \u2013 Trademark\nWar Between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Trademark_War_between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza_%E2%80%93_Background_of_the_Case\"><\/span>Trademark War\nbetween Rooh Afza and Dil Afza \u2013 Background of the Case<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The\nDelhi High Court has refused or declined the plea of <strong><em>Hamdard National Foundation\n(India), <\/em><\/strong>manufacturer of popular \u201cRooh Afza\u201d sharbat, seeking to\nrestrain another company before marketing its sharbat under the name \u201cDil\nAfza\u201d. <strong><em>Justice Asha Menon <\/em><\/strong>mentioned that buying a bottle of sharbat\nmay involve emotions, but not to the extent that buyers would confuse between\nRooh &amp; Dil, which means Spirit &amp; Heart respectively. Justice Asha Menon\nexplained that Hamdard could lay claim to the complete name &#8220;Rooh Afza\u201d\nbut not to either of the two terms that comprise the Trademark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Cites_Similarities_between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza\"><\/span>Cites\nSimilarities between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Hamdard\nhad moved the Court with the disputation in March 2020; they came to know that <strong><em>Sadar\nLaboratories Private Limited <\/em><\/strong>had issued an advertisement launching its\nsharbat named Dil Afza in deceptively identical ringlet bottles as that of Rooh\nAfza bottle. It claimed that Sadar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. had with \u201c<strong><em>mala\nfide intention<\/em><\/strong>\u201d adopted a deceptively identical mark, new get-up, and\ndesign for their product.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Hamdard\nalso claimed that they had acquired huge goodwill and reputation in relation to\n\u201cRooh Afza&#8221;, and the sales&#8217; value had reached around Rs. 30, 963 lakhs in\n2019-20 and Rs. 16,281 lakhs in 2020-21 (till August 2020). Hamdard, also involved\nin the manufacturing &amp; selling business of Unani and ayurvedic medicines,\nsyrups, oils &amp; non-alcoholic beverages for over 100 years, said they had\nacquired heavy promotional expenses for its product. It said that the Trademark\n&#8220;Rooh Afza\u201d was 1<sup>st<\/sup> registered in 1932, and the registration\ncontinues even now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Justice\nAsha Menon agreed with the claim of Hamdard of having built a huge reputation\n&amp; goodwill concerning their Trademark Rooh afza but said that it would be\ntaking a tremendous position, even if the consumers were connoisseurs, to\nbelieve that the use of the term Rooh and Dil would cause confusion because\nthey signify deep emotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Those\nwho understand this emotion would be the first to be able to differential\nbetween Rooh and Dil; the Judge said that in addition to the common customer,\nthe use of the words, Dil and Rooh don\u2019t denote the same thing. Even if the\nsharbat has been produced only since 2020, no case has been made out to\nrestrain the Sadar Laboratories (defendant) from marketing it under the name\nDil Afza the Court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Decision_%E2%80%93_Trademark_War_Between_Rooh_Afza_and_Dil_Afza\"><\/span>Decision \u2013 Trademark\nWar Between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>As per the above discussion, the application was refused with a direction to the defendant to maintain a correct account of sales of Dil Afza sharbat or syrup during the pendency of the present lawsuit and to submit to the Court a quarterly report and account till the disposal of the lawsuit. High Court, in the purview of <em><strong>Section 124(1)(b)(i) of the Trademark Act, 1999<\/strong><\/em><sup><a class=\"text-primary\" href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Indian_trademark_law\"><strong>[1]<\/strong><\/a><\/sup>, the suit has stayed pending the final disposal of the rectification application filed by the plaintiffs. Conclusion of those proceedings, either side may move an application for listing of the suit before the Court.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"text-left\"><b>Read our Article<\/b>:<mark style=\"background: #fffd03 !important;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/procedure-for-drafting-notice-for-trademark-infringement\/\">Procedure for Drafting Notice for Trademark Infringement \u2013 An Overview\n<\/a><\/mark><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The manufacturers of Rooh Afza filed a lawsuit arguing that their name is identical with sharbat in India and that the name Dil Afza is deceptively identical to their product. Buying a bottle of sharbat may involve emotions but not to the extent hoped for manufactures of Rooh Afza, the Delhi High Court said while [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":10257,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[72],"tags":[965],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10255"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10255"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10255\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10271,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10255\/revisions\/10271"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10257"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10255"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10255"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swaritadvisors.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10255"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}