The Delhi High Court in the case Inter Ikea Systems BV v. Ikea Luxury Furniture observed and has restrained the Kerala based furniture store, ‘Ikea Luxury Furniture’ from using the mark ‘Ikea’ as the trademark or trade name on hoardings, including stationery, banners, handbills, and promotional materials.
The bench headed by Justice Prathiba M Singh in the case was dealing with the trademark infringement suit filed by the multinational furniture company, Inter IKEA Systems BV. Therefore, the suit filed seek protection of its mark ‘IKEA’.
The Ikea in the case alleged that the defendant furniture store was using the mark ‘IKEA’ with regards various furniture items as also on inside hoardings in the shop and boxes of the products.
The court in the case observed that it is being clear from the reading of pleadings and documents that the mark or name ‘IKEA’ is an extremely well-known mark. Thus, the said mark belongs to the Plaintiff, which is a Swedish company and it is being clear that the Plaintiff’s ‘IKEA’ mark and name deserves to be protected.
The court in the case observed that it is the fit case for grant of an ex-parte ad- interim injunction in favour of Ikea, thus the court stated that the defendant was using the mark for identical goods and the products range and targeted the same consumer segment. The court in its order stated that despite the legal notice being communicated, the Defendant has failed to stop use of the mark ‘IKEA’. Further, the court stated that the Defendant shall stand restrained from using the mark or name ‘IKEA’ or any other mark or name which is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s mark ‘IKEA’, either as the trademark or trade name on hoarding of store/shops including stationery, banners, handbills, promotional materials etc. The bench of Justice Singh in the case observed and has stated that the Ikea is free to write to JustDial for taking down the page of the Defendant with the name ‘IKEA Luxury Furniture’. The counsel, Advocates Ms. Shwetasree Majumder, Ms. Tanya Varma, Mr. Rohan Krishna Seth appeared for the petitioner.
