M/S. Nandhini Deluxe vs M/S. Karnataka Cooperative Milk ... on 26 July, 2018
(iv) Learned counsel went to the extent of targeting the finding
that Trademark “NANDHINI” adopted by the respondent is a well-
known inasmuch as such finding was without any supporting
material. In this behalf, he attempted to show that there was no
7 (2015) 221 DLT 359
8 (2001) 5 SCC 73
9 (1997) 4 SCC 201
Civil Appeal Nos. 2937-2942 of 2018 with Ors. Page 25 of 47
finding by the IPAB that the mark “NANDHINI” of the respondent
is a well-known mark. He argued that the concept of well-known
trademark enshrined under Section 11(2) of the Act which gives
wider net of protection to the trademarks in respect of different set
of goods is a completely different than that of the Section 11(1). It
is submitted that for arriving at the conclusion of well-known
trademark there are certain defined parameters on which the
trademark is required to be tested, as held by Delhi High Court in
Nestle India Ltd. v. Mood Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.10