Delhi HC Declines Interim Relief to Google in Hindware Trademark Appeal

The Delhi High Court on Friday refused to grant any interim relief to Google in its appeal against a single judge order restraining the company from using the "HINDWARE" trademark as an advertisement keyword. The court issued notice on the appeal, asked both parties to file written submissions and listed the matter for final hearing on July 24.

LiveLaw reported that a division bench comprising Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora heard the appeal after Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Google, sought interim protection till the final hearing of the matter.

Also Read: FIRST Files Fresh CCI Complaint Against Flipkart Over Alleged Deep Discounting

Google's Defence:

The case raised an important legal question on whether the use of another company’s trademark merely as a backend search trigger, without showing it to users, would amount to trademark infringement, Singhvi said.

He said the single judge’s order made no finding that the use of the trademark as a keyword had confused consumers. Singhvi, quoting earlier division bench orders, submitted that a trademark can be used as a search trigger and it would not be infringement unless there is confusion in the mind of the consumer.

Advocate for Google had argued that there were no issues of consumer protection involved in the dispute and there were no issues of unfair trade practices. He said that there was no finding of confusion recorded in the impugned judgement and sought interim protection.

However, the division bench declined to grant interim relief observing that it was not expressing any opinion on the issue of confusion at this stage. The court said it would be open-minded and consider all aspects of the matter during the final hearing.

The appeal has challenged the single judge’s order of May 22 directing Google LLC and Google India jointly to pay nominal damages of ₹30 lakh to Hindware Limited.

Also Read: FSSAI Pulls Up Alcohol Companies Over Labelling Compliance

Court Findings:

In that judgement, the court held that Google could not escape liability by providing a keyword advertising facility that facilitated trademark infringement and saying that only advertisers were responsible for its misuse.

The spat began when Hindware filed two trademark infringement suits against its rivals Grohe and Cera. Hindware alleged that the companies had purchased the trademark “HINDWARE” and related keyword combinations on Google’s advertising platform, resulting in sponsored advertisements for competing brands appearing when users searched for terms such as “Hindware Sanitaryware”, “Hindware Sanitary” and “Hindware Sanitary Ware India”.

Later on, Grohe, Cera and Omkara Infoweb settled the dispute with Hindware leaving Google as the only contesting defendant.

In the ruling of May, the single-judge had dismissed Google’s argument that it was merely a facilitator of keyword reservations and that the advertisers were solely responsible for the use of trademarks. The court found that Google actively suggested trademarked keywords via its Keyword Planner Tool, held keyword auctions and earned revenue whenever users clicked on sponsored advertisements triggered by those keywords.