CONTACT US
HEAD OFFICE
AHMEDABAD, INDIA
HK Avenue, 19, Swastik Society
Navrangpura
Ahmedabad - 380 009. INDIA
Phone : +91 79 26425258/ 5259
Fax : +91 79 26425262 / 5263
Email : info@hkindia.com
Web : www.HKINDIA.com
REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE - USA
2123 , Stanford Avenue
Mountain View, CA 94040
United States of America
Tel. : 1 650 964 1434
Fax : 1 650 964 4857
MUMBAI
E-102, First Floor,Lloyds Estate Sangam Nagar, Next to V.I.T. College, Wadala (E)
Mumbai -
400 037. INDIA
Tel. : 91 22 24187744
BENGALURU
House no. 316, Ground Floor
"A" Sector, Yelahanka New Town
Bengaluru- 560 064
RAJKOT
2nd Floor, Shivani Complex, Kanta Stri Vikas Gruh Road
Rajkot - 360 002. INDIA
Tel:+91 281 242 731
MORBI
203,Shriji Palace,Savsar Plot, Main Road,
Morbi-363641 INDIA
Phone:91 2822225263
VADODARA
218, Abhisekh Complex Aksharchowk, Old Padra Road
Vadodara 390 020 INDIA
Phone: (0265) 2322015
|
|
|
Atomberg Technologies vs. Luker Electrics
In a significant legal development, Atomberg Technologies Private Limited, a prominent innovator in energy-efficient home appliances, initiated legal proceedings against Luker Electric Technologies Private Limited. The dispute centers on alleged design infringement concerning Atomberg's popular Renesa ceiling fan.
Atomberg, known for its pioneering BLDC (Brushless Direct Current) motor technology, registered the design of its Renesa ceiling fan in September 2018. The company claims that Luker's "Size Zero Fan 1" and "Size Zero Fan 2," registered in March 2022, bear striking similarities to its own design, leading to potential consumer confusion and dilution of brand identity.
The Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice Manish Pitale, examined the evidence presented. It was noted that Atomberg's design had been publicly disclosed prior to its official registration, including through social media posts and marketing materials. This prior publication raised questions about the novelty and originality of the design, essential criteria for protection under the Designs Act, 2000.
Consequently, the court denied Atomberg's request for interim relief, stating that the company failed to establish a prima facie case of design infringement. The court emphasized that for a design to be protected, it must be new or original and not previously published in the public domain.
While Atomberg's claim for interim relief was denied, the broader legal proceedings continue. The outcome of this case may set a precedent for future design infringement disputes in the consumer electronics sector, emphasizing the critical nature of intellectual property strategy in product development and marketing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TOP
Prepared by : Drashti S. Varmora (Advocate)
|
