In a significant trademark ruling, Ludhiana-based Jaipal Gaba and his firm Mack Hosiery have been barred from using the ‘Vimal’ trademark on their products, with the court affirming that the rights to the ‘Vimal’ brand belong exclusively to Reliance Industries Limited (RIL).
The Gujarat High Court recently upheld an order issued earlier by a Commercial Court in Ahmedabad, which had restrained Jaipal Gaba and Mack Hosiery from selling apparel under the brand names ‘Vimal,’ ‘Vimal Jonney,’ and ‘Mack Vimal.’ The action followed a lawsuit filed by RIL for trademark infringement.
RIL, in its 2021 suit, asserted exclusive ownership of the ‘Vimal’ trademark, a brand it has actively used since 1967 and registered under Class 24 (textile and textile goods). The company highlighted the significant investments made over decades to build the brand, including major endorsements by film and cricket celebrities.
The complaint noted that Jaipal Gaba and Mack Hosiery, which retail their products through various online platforms, were prominently using the ‘Vimal’ trademark for similar products like apparel, ready-made garments, T-shirts, and shirts. RIL also alleged that Gaba’s products used the ‘Reliance’ name alongside ‘Vimal,’ compounding the trademark infringement.
In response, Gaba contested the suit’s maintainability, arguing that the Ahmedabad court lacked jurisdiction since his business operations are based in Punjab and other states. Gaba maintained that his rights stemmed from a separate registration of the ‘Vimal’ brand under Class 25 (covering clothing, footwear, and headgear) by Milap Hosiery, with records dating back to 1976. He cited an assignment deed from 1986 transferring usage rights to him and noted registrations of ‘Vmark,’ ‘Vimal Jonney,’ and ‘Mack Vimal’ between 2016 and 2018, backed by user details from 1993.
Following a preliminary hearing, the court observed that although RIL’s and Gaba’s products fall under different trademark classes, they are typically sold in the same retail spaces and are closely associated.
Given RIL’s longstanding use and brand recognition, the court established RIL as the prior user of the ‘Vimal’ trademark.
The court further ruled that the similarity between the marks could cause confusion among consumers, particularly since RIL’s brand has strong nationwide visibility, whereas Gaba’s market presence is more limited. The court stated, “The plaintiff’s case for passing off under Section 135 read with Section 27(2) of the Trademarks Act is prima facie made out,” and found that the defendant’s use of ‘Vimal,’ ‘Mack Vimal,’ and ‘Vimal Jonney’ was deceptive and infringed upon RIL’s goodwill.
The Gujarat High Court subsequently upheld the commercial court’s stay, strengthening RIL’s trademark protection for its iconic ‘Vimal’ brand.
