This case deals with a trademark dispute between Svamaan Financial Services Private Limited and the Sammaan-formative companies (formerly known as INDIABULLS). Svamaan filed for a temporary injunction in the Delhi High Court on the ground that the Sammaan-formative companies were infringing its trademark. \u00a0The Court granted Svamaan\u2019s request, agreeing that Sammaan’s actions were infringing on Svamaan’s trademark rights.<\/p>\n
Svamaan incorporated in 2017 is an RBI registered Non-Banking Finance Company \u2013Micro Finance Institution which commenced its operations in January 2019. The mark \u2018SVAMAAN\u2019 along with a device mark for the same, were adopted in relation to financial services in 2017 and registered in various classes including class 36.<\/p>\n
The Defendants, part of the INDIABULLS Group were incorporated as early as in 2005. In 2024, Defendant no.1 transformed from a promoter-led and promoter-driven lender (housing finance company) to a mortgage-focused non-banking financial company. Following this transformation, the Defendants rebranded themselves with SAMMAAN formative corporate names.<\/p>\n
In November 2023, Svamaan had issued a Cease-and-Desist notice when it learned that Defendant no.1 was intending to change its name and identity to \u2018SAMMAAN CAPITAL\u2019. In its interim response, the Defendant no.1 stated that it was merely changing its corporate name to \u2018SAMMAAN CAPITAL\u2019. However, trademark applications for the word mark, \u2018SAMMAAN CAPITAL\u2019 and the device marks, \u2018\u2019SAMMAAN, SAMMAAN FINANCE\u2018\u2019 and “SAMMAAN FINSERVE” were filed in class 36 between February and May 2024.<\/p>\n
Svamaan sent mails to the Registrar of Companies and RBI in November 2023 stating that the mark, \u2018SAMMAAN CAPITAL\u2019 was deceptively similar to its trademarks. However, Defendants 1 and 2 were permitted to change their names. Consequently, Svamaan filed, rectification applications with the MCA u\/s 16(1)(b) of Companies Act 2013 which are currently pending adjudication with the MCA. Aggrieved by the Defendants\u2019 adoption of the mark, this suit was filed.<\/p>\n
The Court found that Svamaan had made a prima facie case of trademark infringement, as the Defendants\u2019 marks that were deceptively similar and used for identical services was likely to cause confusion among the public. Hence, the Court ruled in favor of Svamaan, granting an interim injunction by restraining the Defendants from using any mark or name similar to \u2018<\/strong>SVAMAAN\u2019, until the final decision on the case.<\/p>\n Citation: <\/em><\/strong>Svamaan Financial Services Private Limited vs Sammaan Capital Limited & Ors. (I.A. 41270\/2024, I.A. 43249\/2024 and CRL. M.A. 32198\/2024 IN CS(COMM) 871\/2024), Delhi High Court on 10th<\/sup> February 2025. Available at: <\/em>https:\/\/indiankanoon.org\/doc\/111910708\/<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n Authored by<\/strong> Benita Alphonsa Basil, Trademark Team<\/strong><\/p>\n The case note\/s in this blog post have been written by IP Attorneys at BananaIP Counsels based on their review and understanding of the Judgments. It may be noted that other IP attorneys and experts in the field may have different opinions about the cases or arrive at different conclusions therefrom. It is advisable to read the Judgments before making any decisions based on the case notes.<\/p>\nDisclaimer<\/h4>\n