Delhi High Court Restrains Havai Home Products From Using 'HAVAI' Mark in Havells Passing Off Suit

The Delhi High Court has restrained Havai Home Products Pvt. Ltd. and the proprietor of Advance Coolers from selling, marketing, advertising, or offering for sale electrical goods under the marks 'HAVAI' and its device forms.

The court held that the marks are deceptively similar to Havells' registered trademarks.

Justice Jyoti Singh granted the interim injunction in a suit filed by Havells India Limited. The Court found that Havells had made out a prima facie case of passing off.

Havells, an FMEG company, told the court that it holds registrations for the HAVELLS mark dating back to 1955. It also pointed out that the Delhi High Court declared HAVELLS a "well-known" trademark in December 2024.

Havells sued Havai Home Products, which manufactures air coolers, pedestal fans and immersion rods. It also sued the proprietor of Advance Coolers, which markets these products.

Havells alleged that Havai Home Products was using the mark 'HAVAI' in a stylised font deceptively similar to HAVELLS. It further alleged that the company was unauthorizedly using the words "HAVELLS SPARES" on spare parts.

According to Havells, Havai Home Products deliberately altered the font of the last letter 'I' in its registered mark HAVAI so that it appeared as an 'L'. Havells argued that this made the mark phonetically identical to HAVELLS.

The court noted the distinction between Havai Home Products' registered mark and the mark it actually used in the market.

It observed, "Owing to this feature, the mark HAVAI will be ordinarily pronounced as 'Ha-va-ee' or 'Ha-vai' and may not have a phonetic deceptive similarity with HAVELLS. However, sans the serif on 'I', the same is likely to be perceived as letter 'L' and resultantly, the mark HAVAI will be pronounced as 'Ha-va-L', which will be phonetically deceptively similar to HAVELLS"

The court found the change to be deliberate. It observed, "The change in the stylization and font of the letter 'I' in the marks actually used, is indeed a mala fide attempt to sail close to HAVELLS marks and create confusion amongst members of the public."

The court further noted that Havai Home Products had offered no explanation for departing from its own registered mark "save and except to create an overall impression that HAVELLS has an association with the Defendants."

Holding that all three ingredients of passing off, namely goodwill, misrepresentation and damage, were prima facie satisfied, the court concluded, "Present case is a classic and textbook case of passing off, wherein misrepresentation is the founding pillar."

Accordingly, the court restrained Havai Home Products and the proprietor of Advance Coolers from selling, marketing, advertising or offering for sale goods under the marks HAVAI and its device forms, or any other mark deceptively similar to HAVELLS, during the pendency of the suit.

The court clarified that its findings were prima facie in nature and would not influence the final adjudication of the case.