{"id":165,"date":"2025-10-19T10:23:29","date_gmt":"2025-10-19T10:23:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/taps9legalservices.com\/blogs\/?p=165"},"modified":"2025-10-19T10:26:04","modified_gmt":"2025-10-19T10:26:04","slug":"when-trade-mark-infringement-occurs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/taps9legalservices.com\/blogs\/when-trade-mark-infringement-occurs\/","title":{"rendered":"When Trade Mark Infringement occurs"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

When Trade Mark Infringement occurs when marks are deceptive similar in appearance to one another maybe even for a brief period to a customer at the initial stage In Armour Inc v. Anish Agarwal, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 3784<\/strong>, the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that if the customer looking at the infringing Marks associates <\/strong>the same with the plaintiff\u2019s marks even for a brief period, the said marks of the plaintiff would be infringed under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (\u2018Act\u2019). It was further held that the Initial Interest Confusion Test <\/strong>proceeds on the principle that even if the infringing mark causes confusion, albeit limited to the initial stage only, it is sufficient to satisfy the condition of deceptive similarity as contemplated under Section 29 of the Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The very meaning is that even if momentarily a customer is confused and later makes enquiry that brief period of confusion is enough to come to a conclusion that there is infringement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n

Table of Contents<\/p>\nToggle<\/span><\/path><\/svg><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n