Bangalore District Court
Hitek Fine Chemicals Private Limited vs Bhurat Home Solutions on 6 January, 2026
KABC170022472024
IN THE COURT OF LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, (COMMERCIAL COURT) BENGALURU (CCH-89)
Dated this the 6th day of JANUARY, 2026
Present: SRI JITHENDRANATH C.S., B.A., LL.M.,
C/c. LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE
BENGALURU.
Com.O.S.No.1125/2024
BETWEEN:
PLAINTIFF : HITEK FINE CHEMICALS PRIVATE
LIMITED,
A Private Limited Company,
Having its registered address at:
No.10, First Floor,
Bannerghatta Main Road,
Adugodi, Near Mico Factory,
Bangalore,
Karnataka-PIN-560030.
Represented by its Director & Authorized
Signatory: Mr.Karan Kishore Govani.
(By Sri.Gimmi Joseph K, advocate)
- AND -
DEFENDANT : BHURAT'S HOME SOLUTIONS,
A Proprietary concern,
Having its address at:
Cts.No.122/114a,
Pid No 44/494,
Meharwade Complex,
New Cotton Market,
Cotton Market,
Hubballi, Dharwad,
Karnataka-580029.
2
Com.OS.No.1125/2024
Represented by its Proprietor,
Mr.Susheel Bhurat.
(By Sri.Nikhil Patil advocate )
Date of Institution : 20.08.2024
Nature of the suit : Infringement of trade mark
Date of the commencement : 11.03.2025
of recording of the evidence
Date on which the Judgment : 06.01.2026
was pronounced
Total Duration : Year/s Month/s Day/s
01 04 17
Digitally signed by
JITHENDRANATH S
JITHENDRANATH CHELUR
S CHELUR Date: 2026.01.06 17:50:05
+0530
(JITHENDRANATH C.S.)
C/c. LXXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff company claiming to be the registered proprietor of trademarks 'WONDER', 'MARBLEWONDER', 'WHITE WONDER', 'WONDER ENHANCER' has filed the present suit against the defendant firm, seeking a judgment and decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its partners/directors, proprietor and his/her family members, principal officers, agents, principal officers, agents, employees, servants, legal representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, heirs and any other person acting on its behalf 3 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 from passing off or using or infringing plaintiff registered trade mark 'Wonder', or any other Trade name/mark which is similar to that of 'WONDER' either in full or in part or in any other manner or form whatsoever. The plaintiff also sought for the damages quantified at a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- or in the alternative, directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of all the profits earned by them by using the impugned trade mark and defendant be further ordered to pay to the plaintiff such amount as may be found due and payable on such account being taken along with the costs of the suit.
The plaintiff's case, in a nutshell, is as follows:
a) The plaintiff is a company established in the year 1987, duly incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act with the name M/s Hitek Fine Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. The plaintiff is a well-known company in stone cleaning and structural enhancement chemical industry. The plaintiff company produces various products for this purpose, mainly focusing on the marble industry. The plaintiff company is spread across India through its network of authorized 4 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 distributors and other channel partners. The plaintiff company claims that the following are its registered trademarks:
Sl. Trademark Application Goods Description Valid up to No Number 1 WONDER 4355121 Chemicals 22.11.2029 (polymer)used in Stain Proofing Polishes and Polishes for Synthetic Stones;
Chemicals (Polymer) used in Structural Hardening;
Chemicals for
Polishing and
Finishing;
Impregnating Agents
for Concrete;
Chemical Penetrating
Sealers for Natural
Stone.
2 MARBLE 7869837 Chemical (polymer) 06.10.2029
WONDER used in structural
hardening, stain
proofing of natural
and synthetic stones
it advances reflecting
and finishing,
structural
impregnating sealer
cum chemical
3 WHITE 3343875 Industrial Chemicals; 23.08.2026
WONDER Sealants for sealing
surfaces; Chemicals
for preventing stains;
Chemical
preparations for
5
Com.OS.No.1125/2024
sealing. Hardening
preparations;
Chemicals for
cleaning stones;
Chemical brightener
for industrial use.
Adhesive
compositions for use
in industry; Adhesive
fillers for filing
surface blemishes.
4 White 3343877 Same as above 23.08.2026
Wonder
5 WONDER 3343880 Same as above 23.08.2026
ENHANCER
6 Wonder 3343881 Same as above 23.08.2026
Enhancer
b) The plaintiff adopted the trade mark
'MARBLEWONDER', a coined expression derived from the words MARBLE & WONDER and be distinctive in relation to the plaintiff.
c) The word 'WONDER' is one of the most indivisible parts of plaintiff's trade mark. Since 1995 people are identified the mark 'WONDER' along with MARBLEWORNDER' in the field of Chemicals used in Stain Proofing Polishes and Polishes for Synthetic Stones, chemicals used in Structural Hardening; Chemicals for Polishing and Finishing impregnating agents for concrete, chemical penetrating sealers for Natural stone 6 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 and various other products of the plaintiff with 'WONDER' as part of the products' trademark. For better protection of the word 'WONDER' apart from the common right the plaintiff has registered the trade mark 'WONDER' in their name. The Registrar accepted the trade mark for the registration owing to its long standing usage as well as the market population.
d) In the year 1995, Plaintiff adopted the trademark "MARBLEWONDER" which is a coined word derived from the two words MARBLE and WONDER, which stands unique in the name of Plaintiff. It is to be noted that the word WONDER is one of the most indivisible parts of Plaintiff's trademark. Since 1995 people have identified the mark WONDER along with MARBLEWONDER in the field of Chemicals (polymer) used in Stain Proofing Polishes and Polishes for Synthetic Stones, Chemicals (Polymer) used in Structural Hardening, Chemicals for Polishing and Finishing, Impregnating Agents for Concrete; Chemical Penetrating Sealers for Natural Stone and various other products of the Plaintiff with WONDER as part of the product's trademark. For better protection of the word WONDER apart from the common right, the Plaintiff has registered the trademark WONDER in their name. The 7 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 Registrar accepted the trademark for registration owing to its long-standing usage as well as the market population.
e) The Plaintiff's product enhances the durability and resistance of stone by allowing sealants, polishes, cleaners, and shiners to penetrate deeper into the stone's structure. This eliminates the need for topcoat and impregnating sealers and makes the stone more resistant to weathering conditions and stains. As a result of its success, the Plaintiff company has gained significant recognition and popularity in the market, becoming a top choice for customers. The trademarks "WONDER," "MARBLEWONDER," "WHITE WONDER," and "WONDER ENHANCER" are now recognised worldwide, and people exclusively associate these marks with the Plaintiff due to their established presence in the market.
f) Due to the ongoing and long-term use of the Plaintiff's trademarks since 1995, the marks "MARBLEWONDER,"
"WONDER," "WHITE WONDER," and "WONDER ENHANCER"
have gained distinctiveness and instant recognition, creating secondary meaning in the minds of the public. The mark 8 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 "WONDER" is a predominant part. The Plaintiff has been continuously selling the products for many decades.
g) The plaintiff alleges that the defendant is engaged in the preparation and supply of glues and adhesives, organic composite solvents and thinners, hand sharpening, polishing etc. The defendant has been being business with the plaintiff as a retailer since 2001 and became plaintiff's stockist and supplier in April 2023. Subsequently, the plaintiff terminated the defendant from the above status due to violations of company policy. Soon after termination, the defendant started selling its products using the plaintiff's trademark 'WONDER'. The defendant is also selling its products under the name 'WONDER' through the India Mart website across India. Plaintiff alleges that selling the product using the name 'WONDER' gives an impression to the general public that the defendant's products bearing the mark 'WONDER' originated from plaintiff's company. In order to prevent the defendant from infringing the trademark rights of the plaintiff, the plaintiff has filed the present suit. 9
Com.OS.No.1125/2024
2. The defendant filed his detailed written statement traversing the plaint averments. The defendant denied that the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the trademarks mentioned in the plaint and that the marks of the plaintiff are distinct, unique etc. The defendant alleged that the plaintiff's marks are generic, descriptive or commonly used in the trade and therefore, cannot be claimed exclusively by the plaintiff. The defendant version is that "Bhurat's Home Solutions" is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and is duly represented by its Karta - Mr.Susheel Bhurat. The defendant is a sister concern of SN enterprises and acts as a wholesale trader of the products supplied by SN enterprises. The defendant deals in various products including Tile Adhesives, Stone Adhesives, Marble Adhesives/Cleaners, Stone Sealers, Polishing Liquids, Epoxy Resin, Marble Sealer, Polishing Powder, Jointing Adhesives, Epoxy Grout and Joint remover, which are sold under defendant's trade mark "CASACHEM". The defendant admits that the defendant was a stockist of the plaintiff by the virtue of Stockist Agreement, the defendant was appointed as the exclusive authorized distributor for the promotion and sale of the plaintiff's goods within the regions 10 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 of North Karnataka & Goa. The defendant subsequently, discovered that the plaintiff had been directly engaging in the promotion and sale of its goods within the aforesaid regions, without the defendant's knowledge or consent in violation of the terms of Stockist Agreement. The defendant admitted that the defendant was selling its products under the name 'WONDER' via India Mart website. However, having been received the calls of the plaintiff that the mark 'WONDER' is a registered trade mark of the plaintiff, the defendant immediately in the month of May-2024 ceased using the said mark. The defendant modified its product as "Transparent CasaChem Stone Lux Stone Sealer, Packaging Type: Bucket Rs.12,000/-". The defendant said that it has never infringed the trade marks rights of the plaintiff. The defendant prayed to reject the suit.
3. On the basis of the above pleadings, this court has framed the following issues:
ISSUES
1. Whether plaintiff proves that the defendant is passing of or using 'Wonder' trademark similar to the plaintiff's trademark 'WONDER?11
Com.OS.No.1125/2024
2. Whether plaintiff proves that defendant is infringing the registered trademark of plaintiffs?
3. Whether plaintiff proves that he has sustained a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- damages due to the act of defendants?
4. Whether plaintiff is entitled for the relief sought in the suit?
5. What order or decree?
4. In order to prove its case, Sri.Karan Kishore Govani, the Director of the plaintiff company examined as PW.1 and relied upon Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.21.
5. The defendant Sri.Susheel Bhurat examined as DW.1 and marked Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.17 documents.
6. The court has heard arguments addressed by learned counsel for the plaintiff and learned counsel for the defendant. Having appreciated the evidence before it, the court answers the above issues as follows:
Issue No.1 : In the affirmative, Issue No.2 : In the affirmative, Issue No.3 : In the negative, Issue No.4 : Partly in the affirmative, Issue No.5 : As per final order for the following:12
Com.OS.No.1125/2024 REASONS Evidence before the court:
7. In his evidence affidavit PW.1, Sri.Karan Kishore Gvani, reiterated the plaint averments. Ex.P.1 is the copy of certificate of incorporation dated 02.02.1987. Ex.P.2 is the Board resolution dated 10.01.2020. Ex.P.3 & P.4 are the trademark registration certificate for the word mark 'WONDER' in class-1. Ex.P.5 & P.6 are the trademark registration certificate for the device mark 'MARBLEWONDER' in class-1. Ex.P.7 & P.8 are the trademark registration certificate for the word mark 'WHITE WONDER' in class-1. Ex.P.9 & P.10 are the trademark registration certificate for the device mark 'WHITE WONDER' in class-1. Ex.P.11 & P.12 are the trademark registration certificate for the word mark 'WONDER ENHANCER' In class-1. Ex.P.13 & P.14 are the trademark registration certificate for the device mark 'WONDER ENHANCER' in class-1. Ex.P.15 to 17 are the three photographs of the products of the plaintiff. Ex.P.18 is the copies of screenshots of the website of the plaintiff. Ex.P.19 are the copies of screenshots of website of the defendant. 13
Com.OS.No.1125/2024 Ex.P.20 is the Certificate U/Sec.63(4)(c) of BSA 2023. Ex.P.21 is the photograph of the products of the defendant.
8. In his evidence affidavit the DW.1 reiterated on par with the written statement. Ex.D.1 is the stockist agreement, Ex.D.2 is the screenshots of Whats-App conversation, Ex.D.3 is the copy of GST Registration Certificate, Ex.D.4 is the brochure of CASACHEM Tile Adhesive, Ex.D.5 is the brochure of CASACHEM Marble Chemicals, Ex.D.6 is the termination letter issued by the plaintiff through Whats-app dated 01.10.2023 through which terminated the stockist agreement. Ex.D.7 is the search report. Ex.D.8 is the printout of defendant's IndiaMART web page. Ex.D.9 is the printout of IndiaMART web page displaying the defendant's products. Ex.D.10 is the trademark registration certificate dated 31.05.2024 of CASACHEM. Ex.D.11 is the monthly summary from 01.04.2024 to 16.11.2024. Ex.D.12 is the invoices of sale of CASACHEM STONE LUX to various customers. Ex.D.13 is the certified monthly inward and outward statement of the defendant. Ex.D.14 is the photographs of products displayed for the sale. Ex.D.15 is the photographs of products of the defendant under the name CASACHEM 14 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 STONE LUX, Ex.D.16 & Ex.D.17 are the two Certificates under Section 63B of BSA.
Re-issues Nos.1 to 4:-
9. The defendant was the stockist of the plaintiff and subsequently the stockist agreement was terminated. The present dispute is not arising out of stockist agreement and therefore, there is no need to give much importance to the jural relationship between the parties. The defendant admitted that earlier it had intended to sell its products under the label 'CasaWonder Lux', on receipt of the notice from the plaintiff, the said product was withdrawn. The plaintiff has registered the word mark 'WONDER' 'WhiteWonder' and 'Wonder Enhancer' in class-1. Since the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the said word marks in the same category, the defendant is not supposed to use the same mark. In fact, as noted earlier, on receipt of the notice, the defendant withdrawn his products displayed for sale under the mark 'WONDER'. The defendant has not made out that it has a right to use the trademark 'WONDER' for its products. In the cross-examination DW.1 stated that they were about to launch their product under the mark 15 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 'WONDERLUX', but they dropped their idea. The plaintiff has not produced any material to show that soon after issuance of the notice, the defendant continued to sell its products under the trademark 'WONDER' are any mark deceptively similar thereto. Since the defendant attempted to launch its product under the trademark 'WONDER STONE LUX', the plaintiff being the registered proprietor of the trademarks 'WONDER', 'MARBLEWONDER, 'WHITE WONDER', etc., has a right to protect its trademark rights. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled for the injunction as sought for under prayer 'a' and 'b'. The plaintiff has sought for damages of Rs.5,50,000/- from the defendant. The damages shall be ascertained on the basis evidence. The plaintiff produced no evidence to prove that it has really suffered a loss of Rs.5,50,000/- from the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled for relief 'c'. The plaintiff has not placed any material before the court that the defendant has really sold its product under the trademark of the plaintiff. Therefore, there is no need to call the defendant to rendish the accounts. The defendant, despite knowing the fact that the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of several trademarks 16 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 under the word 'WONDER', has made an attempt to sell his products under the deceptively similar name which made the plaintiff to file the present suit. Therefore, the plaintiff is certainly entitled for the cost of the present suit.
Issue No.5:-
10. In view of the findings on aforesaid issues, the court proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The suit is hereby partly decreed with costs.
It is hereby restrained the defendant, its partners/ directors, proprietor and his/her family members, principal officers, agents, employees, servants, legal representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, heirs, and any other person acting on its behalf from passing off or using 'Wonder', or any other Trade name/mark which is similar to Plaintiff's trademark "WONDER" either in full or in part or in any other manner or form whatsoever.
It is hereby restrained the defendant, its partners/directors, proprietor and his / her family members, principal officers, agents, employees, servants, legal representatives, affiliates, subsidiaries, heirs, and any other person acting on its behalf from infringing plaintiff's registered 17 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 trademark "Wonder", or any other trade name/mark which is similar to plaintiff's trademark "WONDER" either in full or in part or in any other manner or form whatsoever.
The rest of the reliefs are hereby rejected.
Draw decree accordingly.
[Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me then pronounced in the Open Court, on this the 6th day of January, 2026] JITHENDRANATH Digitally signed by JITHENDRANATH S CHELUR S CHELUR Date: 2026.01.06 17:50:22 +0530 (JITHENDRANATH C.S.) C/c.LXXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the plaintiff:
PW-1 Karan Kishore Govani List of documents marked on behalf of the plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 Copy of certificate of incorporation dated 02.02.1987 Ex.P.2 Board resolution dated 10.01.2020 Ex.P.3 & 4 Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 01.01.2022 Ex.P.5 & 6 Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 10.08.2015 Ex.P.7 & 8 Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 16.10.2019 Ex.P.9 & 10 Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 06.05.2017 Ex.P.11 & Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 12 04.07.2019 18 Com.OS.No.1125/2024 Ex.P.13 & Legal use certificate dated 19.11.2024, dated 14 19.06.2019 Ex.P.15 to 3 photocopies (subject to proof) 17 Ex.P.18 Copies of screenshots from website (5 pages) (subject to proof) Ex.P.19 Copies of screenshots from website (6 pages) (subject to proof) Ex.P.20 Certificate U/Sec.63(4)(c) of BSA 2023 Ex.P.21 Photograph of the products of the defendant List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defendants:
DW-1 Susheel Bhurat List of documents marked on behalf of the defendants:
Ex.D.1 Stokist Agreement
Ex.D.2 Screenshots of Whats-App conversation
Ex.D.3 Copy of GST Certificate
Ex.D.4 Brochure of CASACHEM Tile Adhesive
Ex.D.5 Brochure of CASACHEM Marble Chemicals
Ex.D.6 Letter issued by the plaintiff through Whatsapp
dated 01.10.2023
Ex.D.7 Search report
Ex.D.8 Printout of defendant's IndiaMART webpage
Ex.D.9 Printout of IndiaMART webpage displaying the
defendant's products
Ex.D.10 Registration certificate dated 31.05.2024 (Subject
to proof)
Ex.D.11 Monthly statement
Ex.D.12 Invoices of sale of CASACHEM STONE LUX to
various customers
Ex.D.13 Certified monthly inward and outward statement
of the defendant
Ex.D.14 Photographs of products displayed for the sale
19
Com.OS.No.1125/2024
Ex.D.15 Photographs of stored under the name CASACHEM STONE LUX Ex.D.16 & 2 Certificates under Section 63B of BSA Ex.D.17 Digitally signed by JITHENDRANATH S JITHENDRANATH CHELUR S CHELUR Date: 2026.01.06 17:50:28 +0530 (JITHENDRANATH C.S.) C/c.LXXXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.