38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, December 09, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Delhi HC Rejects Trademark Infringement Plea by Britannia Against ITC's Sunfeast Digestive Biscuits

By Tanya Sehrawat      07 April, 2021 01:27 PM      0 Comments
Trademark Infringement Britannia Sunfeast

Britannia Industries Limited filed a Trademark Infringement Suit against ITC, accusing its Sunfeast Farmlite Digestive Biscuits of being an exact copy of Britannia's Nutri Choice Digestive Biscuits. 

The said petition was dismissed by a single judge Bench of Justice C Hari Shankar of the Delhi High Court on April 6, 2021.

Britannia had registered a trademark on the packaging of NutriChoice Digestive biscuits on Sep 11, 2020. The same was being used by it since 2014. However, different packaging was used by Sunfeast then. 

Following this, Britannia claimed change in Sunfeasts FarmLite 5-Seed Digestive biscuits as on September 28, 2020 so as to be deceptively similar NutriChoice's packaging. It accused Sunfeast of taking advantage of its reputation and goodwill.

While taking note of Sections 29(1) and 29(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Court said that they must be interpreted so as to observe "points of dissimilarity between rival marks cannot be regarded as irrelevant." Along with this, the Court held that ITC Sunfeast's FarmLite Digestive Biscuits could not be stated as deceptively similar to Britannia's NutriChoice Digestive biscuits to the extent that one with average intelligence alongside imperfect recollection could get confused between the two. 

The Court also said:

"The perception, whether in the case of infringement or passing off, is to be that of a person of average intelligence and imperfect recollection not of an idiot, or an amnesiac. The average human mind has not been particularly conditioned to observe only similarities, and overlook dissimilarities.

The Court highlighted that the biscuits of the two companies could be sufficiently differentiated and said that, "If similarities can cause deception or confusion, dissimilarities, if sufficient, can also obviate any such possibility. It was further observed how a person of average intelligence and imperfect recollection cannot said to be easily confused. 



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-questions-precedent-on-contractual-bars-to-arbitration-claims-refers-bharat-drilling-to-larger-bench
Trending Judiciary
SC Questions Precedent on Contractual Bars to Arbitration Claims, Refers ‘Bharat Drilling’ to Larger Bench [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court refers the 2009 Bharat Drilling ruling to a larger bench, questioning its use in interpreting contractual bars on arbitration claims.

08 December, 2025 04:45 PM
j-and-k-high-court-upholds-dismissal-of-injunction-plea-in-agrarian-reforms-dispute
Trending Judiciary
J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal of Injunction Plea in Agrarian Reforms Dispute [Read Order]

J&K High Court upholds dismissal of injunction plea, ruling that agrarian disputes fall under Agrarian Reforms Act authorities, not civil courts.

08 December, 2025 05:21 PM

TOP STORIES

hostile-india-china-ties-no-extradition-treaty-allahabad-hc-denies-bail-to-chinese-national-in-visa-forgery-case
Trending Judiciary
Hostile India–China Ties, No Extradition Treaty: Allahabad HC Denies Bail to Chinese National in Visa Forgery Case [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court denies bail to a Chinese national accused of visa tampering and forging Indian IDs, citing hostile India–China ties and no extradition treaty.

03 December, 2025 12:53 AM
attachment-before-judgment-cannot-cover-property-sold-prior-to-suit-filing-sc
Trending Judiciary
Attachment Before Judgment Cannot Cover Property Sold Prior to Suit Filing: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court holds that property transferred before a suit cannot be attached under Order 38 Rule 5; fraud allegations must be pursued separately under Section 53 TP Act.

03 December, 2025 01:30 AM
sc-holds-no-review-or-appeal-maintainable-against-order-appointing-arbitrator
Trending Judiciary
SC Holds No Review Or Appeal Maintainable Against Order Appointing Arbitrator [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that no review, recall or appeal lies against a Section 11 arbitrator appointment order, reaffirming minimal judicial interference in arbitration.

03 December, 2025 01:40 AM
partner-cannot-invoke-arbitration-clause-without-express-authorisation-of-other-partners-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Partner Cannot Invoke Arbitration Clause Without Express Authorisation of Other Partners: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court rules that a partner cannot invoke an arbitration clause or seek appointment of an arbitrator without express authorisation from co-partners.

03 December, 2025 05:19 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email