--> Skip to main content

The Name Krishna Cannot Be monopolized by anyone As It is the name of God – Common Name in India

In a recent judgement, the Delhi High Court stated that the name Krishna cannot be monopolized by anyone as it is the name of God. The honourable court said this while passing a judgement trademark case filed by two milk food processing companies. The judgement means that anyone company or person cannot name exclusivity to the name Krishna.
Law Et Al News writes
The suit was filed by Bhole Baba Milk Food Industries against Parul Food Specialties Ltd. claiming exclusivity over the mark Krishna. The petitioner challenging the use of the word by Parul contended that the mark has attained a market reputation to be qualified as a “well known” trademark in terms of section 2(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The court initially had granted interim stay in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant had moved an application for vacation of interim stay and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, proposed altering the picture used with its trademark “Parul’s Lord Krishna” substantially.
Therefore, the court treated the controversy before it to be limited to the use of word “Krishna”. Rejecting the case of plaintiff, the court held, “at this juncture, I cannot come to the conclusion that a name as common as Krishna; which in the cultural context of our country is as common as the word “John” used in West, has achieved in the plaintiff’s case a secondary distinctiveness of the kind that it is inalienably related by the consumers to the plaintiff’s product. The defendant is using the word Krishna with a prefix Parul’s Lord. There have been in my opinion substantial changes incorporated in the label mark of the defendant in so far as the colour scheme and the  pictorial  representation is concerned  which should allay any  apprehension that a prudent and a reasonable consumer would be deceived as regards the  origin and the source of the goods on which such a label mark is put.”
The court, however, directed the defendants "to use Kishna as part of its trade mark, by giving equal prominence to the its corporate name in its trademark for it to read as "Parul's Lord Krishna" along with different label to distinct itself from others in the trade.