Karnataka HC Provides Legal Protection To Blinkit In A Trademark Infringement Lawsuit

In an April 17 ruling, the Karnataka High Court provided legal protection to Blinkit, an e-commerce grocery delivery service, against a trademark infringement lawsuit initiated by Blinkhit. The court overturned a temporary injunction previously granted in favor of Blinkhit. Justice SR Krishna Kumar emphasized that the services offered by both parties were distinct from each other. The court determined that the temporary injunction could not be justified merely on the grounds of registering a trademark for a different business activity.

The court faced an appeal challenging a trial court's order that imposed a temporary injunction on Blinkit (formerly known as Grofers) to prevent them from infringing on Blinkhit's trademark.

The appellants, Blinkit, contended that the injunction order was arbitrary due to the respondents' suppression of facts. They further argued that the act of registering a trademark without actual use held no significance, especially considering the distinct nature of both companies' activities.

To support its decision, the court referred to a previous Supreme Court judgment in the case of S Syed Mohideen v P Sulochana Bai. The court concluded that the mere registration of a trademark containing the words "Blinkhit" or "iBlinkhit" did not establish ownership or exclusive rights.

Additionally, the court took note of the fact that Blinkhit had not utilized its registered trademark since 2016 until filing a lawsuit before the trial court.

Based on these considerations, it was determined that Blinkit would suffer irreparable harm if a temporary injunction were to be granted, whereas Blinkhit would not experience any significant hardship if the injunction were denied.

Consequently, the appeal was granted, leading to the dismissal of the temporary injunction. Nevertheless, the trial court received instructions to expedite the resolution of the primary lawsuit, preferably within a year.