In This Issue

Trademark Battle: IndiGo vs. Mahindra Over ‘6E’ Mark

     
CONTACT US
HEAD OFFICE
AHMEDABAD
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
BRANCH OFFICE
MUMBAI
E-102, First Floor,Lloyds Estate Sangam Nagar,
Mumbai - 400 037. INDIA
Phone : +91 22 24187744
BENGALURU

House no. 316, Ground Floor "A" Sector, Yelahanka New Town Bengaluru- 560 064

RAJKOT

Shivani Complex, Kanta Stri Vikas Gruh Road Rajkot - 360 002. INDIA Phone : +91 281 242 731

MORBI

203,Shriji Palace,Savsar Plot, Main Road, Morbi-363641 INDIA Phone:91 2822225263

VADODARA

312-313, 3rd Floor, Abhishek Complex, Akshar Chowk, Old Padra Road,
Vadodara 390 020 INDIA
Phone: (0265) 2322015

 

 

 

Trademark Battle: IndiGo vs. Mahindra Over ‘6E’ Mark

   
 

In a trademark dispute before the Delhi High Court, InterGlobe Aviation Ltd. (IndiGo) has filed a lawsuit against Mahindra Electric Automobiles Ltd., accusing them of infringing its registered trademark "6E." IndiGo’s "6E" mark is prominently used in its airline services, including flight promotions and in-flight offerings. Mahindra, however, launched its electric vehicle, the "BE 6e," and argued that there is no likelihood of confusion as their mark pertains to automobiles, a distinct class under trademark law.

Mahindra further clarified that its trademark application for "BE 6e" in Class 12 (vehicles) is valid and distinct from IndiGo’s use of "6E" in aviation-related services. Despite this, IndiGo claims that the use of the mark by Mahindra, which also features the number "6," could mislead consumers due to the visual and phonetic similarities between "6E" and "BE 6e."

The Delhi High Court is currently assessing whether IndiGo's trademark "6E" qualifies as a "well-known" trademark, which could extend protection beyond its specific registered class (aviation services). The case highlights the issue of how trademarks are protected when companies in different industries may use similar branding, raising questions about the potential for consumer confusion.

At this stage, the court has yet to issue a final ruling, but the case could set an important precedent for how trademark disputes are resolved between industries as diverse as aviation and electric vehicles.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TOP

Prepared by : Drashti S. Varmora (Advocate)

 
 

 

 
 
 
Copyright © 2020. H K ACHARYA & COMPANY