Bpi Sports Llc vs Saurabh Gulati & Anr. on 27 April, 2023
19. The similarity in the two trademarks is writ large on a bare
perusal. Two consequences flow from this conclusion under the
Trademarks regime. Firstly, there is every likelihood of confusion
amongst the public due to similarity of the rival trademarks and
identity of the goods of the competing parties and consequent impact
on the reputation and goodwill of the Petitioner. Secondly, this makes
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KAUSHAL C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 2/2021 Page 15 of 22
KUMAR SACHDEVA
Signing Date:20.09.2023
18:46:07
the impugned mark vulnerable to cancellation of its registration under
Section 11(10)(ii) of the 1999 Act which requires the Registrar of
Trade Marks, while registering the mark, to take into consideration the
bad faith involved, either of the applicant or the opponent, affecting
the right relating to the trade mark. The provision was considered and
interpreted by this Court in BPI Sports LLC (supra) and the Court
held that a purposive interpretation must be given looking at the intent
and purpose of sub-section (10)(ii) of Section 11, which is to disentitle
registration of a trademark, the request for registration of which is
tainted by bad faith. The expression 'bad faith' is not defined under
the 1999 Act and the Court cogitated on the concept by referring to
some English decisions and dictionaries. Broadly understood, 'bad
faith' is the opposite of 'good faith' and conceptually understood, it is
synonymous to 'dishonest intention'. Relevant paragraphs from the
judgment are as under:-