DELHI HC REFUSES TO GRANT INTERIM RELIEF TO PHONEPE IN ITS PLEA AGAINST BHARATPE

27th April 2021

FACTS

The plaintiff uses the mark “PhonePe” and the defendants use the mark “BharatPe”. The plaintiff has sued the defendants, for permanent injunction, against the use of ‘Pe’ of ‘PhonePe’ which is identical and/or similar to the plaintiff’s trademarks ‘PhonePe’, in respect of payment services or any other manner amounting to infringement of the plaintiff’s trademark, or of passing off, by the defendants, of their services as those of the plaintiff.

ARGUMENTS

Counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff has registrations of the marks of PhonePe. “Pe” is a distinguishing feature of the plaintiff’s registered trademarks. A consumer of average intelligence on seeing the defendants’ mark “BharatPe”, bound to result, in an impression of nexus mind of such a consumer, of an impression of nexus between the plaintiff and defendant.

Counsel for the defendants submitted that the plaintiff was not the registered proprietor of the words, “Pe” or the Devnagari “पे” as a standalone mark. The plaintiff had acquired the registration over the entire word “PhonePe”.

DECISION

Exclusivity can be claimed, and infringement/ passing off alleged, only in respect of the entire mark of the plaintiff, and not in respect of part thereof. The plaintiff cannot claim exclusivity solely over the “Pe” suffix, as no infringement can be claimed based on part of a registered trademark.

Therefore, no case for grant of interim injunction against the defendant.

Author: Papiha Ghoshal

Pc - entrackr