The Madras High Court has ruled in favour of the Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Limited (KMF), holding that the use of the trademark “Nandini” for agarbattis and dhoops is deceptively similar to KMF’s well-known dairy brand. The court set aside a 2010 order of the Trade Marks Registry that had earlier rejected KMF’s opposition, bringing a long-running trademark dispute to a close.
Background of the Case
KMF, a federation of milk producers based in Karnataka, has been using the trademark “Nandini” since 1983 for milk and milk-based products. Over the decades, the brand became a household name not only in Karnataka but also in neighbouring states.
Read also:- CAT Stays Disciplinary Action Against Sameer Wankhede, Questions Use of Preliminary Inquiry Material
The dispute arose when Vinod Kanji Shah and Nitin Kanji Shah, trading as Shalimar Agarbatti Company, applied for registration of the mark “nandini” for agarbattis and dhoops under Class 3. KMF opposed the application, arguing that the mark was identical and would mislead consumers due to its long-standing reputation.
In April 2010, the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks dismissed KMF’s opposition, reasoning that “Nandini” was a personal or generic name, that the goods were different, and that there was no likelihood of confusion. KMF challenged this decision, and the matter eventually reached the Madras High Court after the dissolution of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board.
Read also:- Gujarat High Court Upholds Tanker Negligence, Enhances Accident Compensation to ₹1.07 Crore
Arguments Before the Court
KMF contended that its registered mark “Nandini” had acquired distinctiveness through decades of continuous use. It argued that the agarbatti label adopted the same word, written in the same style and lowercase lettering, making it deceptively similar.
The respondents did not effectively contest the appeal. The Trade Marks Registry defended its earlier order, relying on the view that the products were unrelated and that the word itself could not be monopolised.
Court’s Observations
Justice N. Anand Venkatesh examined the rival marks and their overall impression. While acknowledging that “Nandini” is a generic term linked to Hindu mythology, the court stressed that trademark disputes must be decided on the likelihood of confusion in the minds of consumers.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Nandhini Deluxe vs. Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., the judge noted that earlier cases allowed similar words only where the overall get-up, suffixes, and style were clearly different.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Quashes Income Tax Reopening Against Radhika, Prannoy Roy Over Interest-Free Loan Issue
In the present case, the court found a crucial distinction. “Phonetically, the word ‘nandini’ is the same and it has also been written in the same style,” the bench observed. It added that given KMF’s strong reputation, “a customer… will be certainly misled by the style adopted by the first respondent.”The court held that the Trade Marks Registry failed to consider these vital aspects and wrongly concluded that there was no deceptive similarity.
Decision
Allowing KMF’s appeal, the Madras High Court set aside the 2010 order of the Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks. The opposition filed by KMF against the registration of “nandini” for agarbattis and dhoops was upheld. The court passed no order as to costs, formally ending the dispute on January 19, 2026.
Case Title: M/s. Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Ltd. vs. Vinod Kanji Shah & Anr.
Case Number: (T)CMA(TM) No.112 of 2023
