Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

It is apparent from the history of trade marks in this country that both the legislature and the courts have always shown a natural disinclination to allow any person to obtain by registration under the Trade Marks Acts a monopoly in what others may legitimately desire to use. For example, names (unless represented in a special manner) and descriptive words have never been recognised as appropriate for use as trade marks.

In Win-Medicare Limited's suit for passing off, where the facts and issues involved were similar to the case on hand, the High Court of Delhi considered whether the mark DICLOMOL is descriptive. The learned Counsel for defendant therein had contended that in the mark DICLOMOL, prefix DICLO has been taken from DICLOFENAC SODIUM and suffix MOL has been taken from PARACETAMOL which are basic drugs and as such the mark is a descriptive mark and the plaintiff has no exclusive right for use. The Court held thus: "The mark may have been so formed but it cannot be said that an ordinary person or even a medical man will be in a position to say that this mark is so composed unless he is so told. The mark in itself does not convey the idea that it is descriptive of the said basic drug nor has any dictionary meaning. Applying the test laid down in Drorovit's case (supra) as noticed above, in my view the mark DICLOMOL is not descriptive word nor generic word but an invented word."