SC issues notice on trademark infringement SLP while examining whiskey bottles, Blender’s Pride and London Pride
On January 05, 2024, the Supreme Court (SC) of India issued notice on an SLP (Special Leave Petition) challenging the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court refusing to grant an injunction against the alleged trademark infringement of whiskey brands ‘Blender’s Pride’, ‘Imperial Blue’, etc. by Indore-based company JK Enterprises. The SLP was filed by the Indian subsidiary of an international liquor manufacturer, Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd. JK Enterprises manufactures beverages under the ‘London Pride’ trademark. The matter was heard by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Manoj Misra, and Justice J.B. Pardiwala. The bench ordered “Issue notice on the prayer for stay as well as on the Special Leave Petition returnable on 19 January 2023. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted.”
During the court proceedings, Senior Advocate (SA) Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Pernod Ricard stated “There can’t be a better copy, if I may say so, I have put in the photograph but it is better to see.” SA Rohatgi showed the empty bottles of the brands to the Supreme Court bench and requested to examine the packaging and labels on them. Before presenting the products to the SC bench, SA asked for permission and submitted “They have the permission to bring the product inside. I want to show you the product.” CJI responded, “Let’s see the product.” Further, SA submitted, “Both are registered brands (Blender’s Pride and Imperial Blue) with more than rupees 2000 Crores turnover.” While keeping both bottles in front of the bench, Rohatgi mentioned “In this case, the name is not the copy.” He added, “Something worse, the bottle is absolutely identical, Seagram is also mine, they are using it. They are getting it either manufactured from somewhere else or getting from Kabaadi, because they can’t get Seagram.”
The SA highlighted that the violations were on three fronts namely in terms of name, registered mark, and packaging and bottling. During the proceedings, the CJI addressed the Bombay High Court’s judgment on Vodka bottles, Gorbatschow Wodka Kg vs. John Distilleries Ltd. In this context, SA Rohatgi said that most of the relevant cases come from Delhi, Mumbai, and Tamil Nadu. He further mentioned some of the relevant disputes that arose earlier between Blender’s Pride - Casino Pride, Imperial Blue - Imperial Gold, Johnny Walker - Captain Walker, Officer’s Choice- Green Choice, Royal Stag - Indian Stag, and many more. After hearing the contentions, the bench ordered to issue the notice and make it returnable as early as possible.
The decision of the High Court in challenge reads, “...The first word of the trademark of the plaintiffs is ‘Blenders’ whereas that of the defendant is ‘London’. There is absolutely no similarity in them leaving aside any dissimilarity. ‘PRIDE’ being a generic, commonplace, and laudatory expression in the ‘BLENDERS PRIDE” mark, the common man would certainly treat the ‘BLENDERS’ part of the plaintiff’s mark as the dominant part. The question of comparison of the words ‘Imperial Blue’ and ‘London Pride’ does not even rise…” It added, “...It can be safely presumed with a sufficient deal of certainty that the consumers of such products would be mostly literate and having reasonable intelligence to distinguish between the bottles of Blenders Pride/Imperial Blue and that of London Pride. Even if they are of average intelligence with imperfect recollection, they would be able to differentiate between the rival competing brands…Liquor consumers of scotch whiskey are educated and discerning type. They are literate persons belonging to the affluent class of society.”
Along with Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, Advocate Mamta Jha, Advocate Rajul Shrivastav, Advocate Sambhav Jain, Advocate Anubhav Sharma, Advocate Hemant Singh, Advocate Mohit D Ram, Advocate Monisha Handa, and Advocate Reha Mohan represented the Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd.
