Delhi High Court Restrains Kent RO From Using 'KENT' Mark For Fans, Notes Prior Use By Kent Cables

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday upheld an interim injunction restraining Kent RO Systems Limited from manufacturing or selling fans under the trademark “KENT”, affirming a single judge's order passed in favour of Kent Cables Private Limited.

In a judgment delivered on March 11, 2026, a division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Madhu Jain dismissed the appeals filed by the purifier manufacturer and held that the cable company had shown prior adoption of the mark for electrical goods and prima facie use of the mark for fans, disentitling Kent RO from seeking injunctive relief at the interim stage.

“Therefore, the prior use of the mark 'KENT' by the respondents for fans, is itself sufficient to disentitle the appellants for an injunctive relief against the respondents, at least, at this interim stage,” the Court said.

Kent RO Systems had challenged a discretionary order passed by the single judge on applications for interim injunction in cross-suits between the parties. The single judge had restrained Kent RO from manufacturing and selling fans under the “KENT” mark during the pendency of the suit, while refusing to restrain Kent Cables Private Limited from using the same mark.

The order was based on a prima facie finding that Kent Cables was the prior adopter of the mark for electrical goods and had been in the business of fans for over 15 years, whereas Kent RO had not used the mark for fans despite being aware of the rival's use since at least 2011.

The division bench noted that the respondents had applied for registration of the mark “KENT” for fans in 1998 on a proposed-to-be-used basis, which was opposed by Kent RO in 2007, but no further legal action was taken apart from issuing a cease-and-desist notice in 2011. The court also observed that while Kent RO had adopted the mark for oil meters in 1988, the respondents had adopted the mark for wires and cables in 1986 and had prima facie shown use of the mark for fans since 2009.

Holding that the cable company's prior use and the prifier manufacturer's delay and acquiescence weighed against the grant of injunction, the court found no ground to interfere with the single judge's discretionary order and dismissed the appeals.