Trademark rights-infringing comparative advertising in India

Banerjee, Arpan (2019) Trademark rights-infringing comparative advertising in India. In: Annotated leading trademark cases in major Asian jurisdictions. Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 315-330. ISBN 9780429316395

[thumbnail of ABanerjee2019 T&F.pdf] Text
ABanerjee2019 T&F.pdf - Published Version
Restricted to Registered users only

Download (193kB) | Request a copy


In India, the English law has developed differently. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 broadly follows its United Kingdom counterpart. However, independent of trademark law, Indian courts have provided an effective remedy to parties aggrieved by comparative advertising by deviating from English law and diluting the malice requirement in tortious disparagement actions. The Trade Marks Act 1938, like its predecessor, dealt with classical trademark infringement. In Yeast-Vite v Horsenail the plaintiff sought action against a comparative advertisement by alleging both malicious falsehood and trademark infringement. The judge upheld both the parties’ respective claims for tortious disparagement and trademark infringement, and passed an injunction restraining all the advertisements in question. In Paras v Ranbaxy and Reckitt Benckiser v Emami claims for tortious disparagement and trademark infringement were both addressed and upheld. The Calcutta High Court observed that “the comparison was not fair and truthful”, and amounted to prima facie trademark infringement.

Item Type: Book Section
Keywords: Comparative Law | Jurisprudence
Subjects: Social Sciences and humanities > Social Sciences > Law and Legal Studies
JGU School/Centre: Jindal Global Law School
Depositing User: Shilpi Rana
Date Deposited: 14 Dec 2021 11:54
Last Modified: 10 Jan 2022 08:36
Official URL:


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item