Delhi High Court Restrains IKEY from IKEA-like Branding Practices

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction in favor of IKEA, the globally renowned home furnishing giant, against IKEY Home Studio, an Indian company accused of trademark infringement. The court found that IKEY’s branding was deceptively similar to IKEA’s trademark, which enjoys a strong reputation worldwide.

Justice Mini Pushkarna restrained IKEY Home Studio from using the marks ‘IKEY’, ‘IKEY Home Studio’, or any other branding that might mislead consumers into associating it with IKEA’s well-established trademark. Furthermore, the court barred the Indian firm from passing off its products as IKEA’s.

The court order, dated December 18, stated:
“Until the next date of hearing, defendant no.1, its partners, their legal heirs, proprietors, employees, servants, agents, representatives, and others in active concert with them are restrained from selling, advertising, importing, exporting, or in any other way dealing in goods or providing services under the impugned mark ‘IKEY’, ‘IKEY Home Studio’, or any other deceptively similar mark in a manner amounting to infringement of the plaintiff’s trademark or passing off.”

Domain Name Suspension Ordered

In addition to halting IKEY’s branding activities, the court ordered the suspension of the domain name ikeyllp.com until the case is resolved. The court also directed IKEY to disclose the registrant details of the domain.

IKEA’s Argument

IKEA, founded in 1943, highlighted that its trademark has achieved global recognition and goodwill, having been officially recognized as well-known in several countries, including China, Italy, Turkey, and Vietnam. The company cited multiple rulings by the WIPO Arbitration and Conciliation Centre to reinforce its claims.

The issue came to light when IKEA discovered five trademark applications by IKEY through routine market checks. Despite sending a cease-and-desist notice, IKEY denied any similarities between the trademarks. However, IKEA’s investigation revealed that IKEY operated a store and a website under its brand name, showcasing a wide variety of products and misleadingly associating itself with “renowned brands”, potentially confusing customers.

Court Observations

Justice Pushkarna noted that IKEA had made a prima facie case for the injunction and emphasized the potential for irreparable loss if the matter went unaddressed. The balance of convenience, she said, lay in favor of IKEA.

As no representatives from IKEY appeared in court, an ex-parte injunction was passed, with further hearings scheduled for May 9, 2025.

IKEA was represented by advocates Shwetasree Majumder, Tanya Varma, Vardaan Anand, and Ruchika Yadav.