38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, November 13, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
CelebStreet

Delhi HC rejects Lotus Herbals' plea against Deepika Padukone's co's use of 'Lotus Splash' [Read Judgment]

By Shreya Agarwal      29 January, 2024 02:45 PM      0 Comments
*Delhi HC rejects Lotus Herbals' plea against Deepika Padukone's co's use of 'Lotus Splash'*

NEW DELHI: In a relief to Bollywood actor Deepika Padukone's cosmetics brand DPKA Universal Consumer Ventures Pvt Ltd (DPKA), the Delhi High Court has rejected a plea by Lotus Herbals Private Limited (Lotus Herbals) against the companys use of the mark 'Lotus Splash' for its face cleanser.

Noting that the only commonality between Lotus Herbals' and DPKAs mark is the word lotus, the Court held that no prima facie case of passing off exists in the matter.

The matter was decided by a single-judge bench of Justice C Hari Shankar.

The Court also found merit in DPKAs argument that the mark Lotus Splash is obviously used to indicate that the product contains lotus extract as its key ingredients. 

It therefore found substance in DPKAs contention that they would be entitled to the protection of Section 30(2)(a) of the Trademarks Act. 

Section 30(2)(a) of provides that:

A registered trade mark is not infringed where (a) the use in relation to goods or services indicates the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of goods or of rendering of services or other characteristics of goods or services.

Hence, on the basis of Section 30(2)(a) the bench decided that DPKAs use of the mark Lotus Splash cannot be regarded as infringing in nature.

The bench also highlighted the dissimilarity in appearance and significant price differences between the products and reasoned that both the products were easily distinguishable. 

Thus, the Court held that there is no attempt by Deepika Padukones DPKA brand to pass off Lotus Splash as a product of Lotus Herbals range of cosmetics.  

While Lotus Herbals asserted that all its products are sold under the Lotus mark and the same has become indelibly associated with their brand for more than 31 years, the Court was not inclined to accept the argument.

Primarily, Krishnan established the bona fides of the use of the mark by DPKA and emphasized that they also consistently use the 82E mark on all cosmetic products, thereby distinguishing their products from Lotus Herbals'.

Lotus Herbal was represented by Sr. Adv. Akhil Sibal, whereas DPKA was represented by Sr. Adv. Dayan Krishnan who defended the use of the lotus mark by DPKAs cosmetics brand.

Cause Title: Lotus Herbals Private Limited v DPKA Universal Consumer Ventures Private Limited & Ors.

 

[Read Judgment]



Share this article:

About:

A wanderer, aspiring yogini and writer. Shreya is a lawyer by profession, journalist by passion. A g...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

'Without documentary proof, Waqf Board can't lay claim over any property' 'Without documentary proof, Waqf Board can't lay claim over any property'

In 2012, the Anjuman Committee addressed a letter to the Chairman of the Waqf Board stating there is a wall and Chabutrah (platform) on a 'Tiranga Ki Qalandari Masjid where in olden times laborers used to offer prayers.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Tribunal's Award Against NHAI in Highway Project Delay Case [Read Judgment] Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Tribunal's Award Against NHAI in Highway Project Delay Case [Read Judgment]

The Delhi High Court sets aside an Arbitral Tribunal's award favoring IRB Pathankot Amritsar Toll Road Ltd over a delay in a highway project. The court finds that the tribunal did not address the essential dispute of whether the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) was in material default, rendering the award invalid.

Delhi Court Rejects Stay Request in Defamation Case Against Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot [Read Order] Delhi Court Rejects Stay Request in Defamation Case Against Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot [Read Order]

A Delhi court refuses to stay the defamation case filed by Union Cabinet minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat against Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot. The court declined to stay the summons and sets a hearing date for August 19.

Delhi High Court to Commence Daily Hearings on August 28 for Appeals Against Acquittals in 2G Case Delhi High Court to Commence Daily Hearings on August 28 for Appeals Against Acquittals in 2G Case

Delhi High Court is set to begin day-to-day hearings from August 28 for appeals by CBI and ED against acquittals in the 2G spectrum allocation case, expressing displeasure over adjournment requests. The case involves former telecom minister A Raja and business entities. Learn about the proceedings and details of the case.

TRENDING NEWS

allahabad-hc-declares-transgender-rights-act-a-special-law-orders-board-to-amend-educational-records
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Declares Transgender Rights Act a Special Law, Orders Board to Amend Educational Records [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court rules Transgender Rights Act, 2019 as special law; directs education board to update transgender man’s name and gender in records.

12 November, 2025 11:00 AM
sc-grants-statutory-status-to-delhi-ridge-management-board-to-safeguard-delhis-green-lungs
Trending Judiciary
SC Grants Statutory Status to Delhi Ridge Management Board to Safeguard Delhi’s “Green Lungs” [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court directs statutory status for Delhi Ridge Management Board, calling the Ridge Delhi’s “green lungs” vital to combat rising air pollution.

12 November, 2025 11:15 AM

TOP STORIES

arrest-and-remand-illegal-if-written-grounds-not-provided-two-hours-before-production-sc
Trending Judiciary
Arrest and Remand Illegal if Written Grounds Not Provided Two Hours Before Production: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules arrests and remands illegal if written grounds aren’t furnished at least two hours before the accused’s production before a Magistrate.

07 November, 2025 04:20 PM
adult-christian-daughter-not-entitled-to-maintenance-us-125-crpc-unless-disabled-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Adult Christian Daughter Not Entitled to Maintenance u/s 125 CrPC Unless Disabled: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court held that an adult Christian daughter cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC unless unable to maintain herself due to disability.

07 November, 2025 04:57 PM
magistrates-power-to-order-probe-under-section-156-3-crpc-cannot-be-invalidated-for-mere-technical-errors-sc
Trending Judiciary
Magistrate’s Power to Order Probe Under Section 156(3) CrPC Cannot Be Invalidated for Mere Technical Errors: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that a Magistrate’s order under Section 156(3) CrPC cannot be nullified for minor technical or linguistic errors if offences are made out.

07 November, 2025 05:05 PM
physiotherapists-and-occupational-therapists-cannot-use-dr-prefix-without-medical-qualification-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Physiotherapists And Occupational Therapists Cannot Use ‘Dr’ Prefix Without Medical Qualification: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court restrains physiotherapists and occupational therapists from using ‘Dr.’ prefix without recognized medical qualification.

07 November, 2025 05:32 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email