Deceptively similar trademarks in India: the test

Under Indian law, a mark is deceptively similar to another if it so nearly resembles that mark that it is likely to deceive or cause confusion (Section 2(1)(h) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999). The marks don't need to be identical: a similar sound, look or idea, used on the same or related goods, can be enough. It is the test behind many trademark objections, oppositions and infringement cases.

What does "deceptively similar" mean?

The definition in Section 2(1)(h) is short: a mark is deceptively similar if it "so nearly resembles" another mark that it is likely to deceive or cause confusion. Two other sections put it to work:

• Section 11(1) stops registration of a mark that is identical or similar to an earlier mark for identical or similar goods or services, where there is a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, "which includes the likelihood of association". In plain words: buyers might think the two businesses are connected.
• Section 29(1) makes use of an identical or deceptively similar mark an infringement of a registered trademark in the situations it lists.

Note the word likely. Nobody has to prove that a customer was actually fooled. The question is whether confusion is likely.

How do courts decide if two marks are deceptively similar?

The basic question is simple: would an average buyer of ordinary intelligence and imperfect recollection be likely to be confused? Courts compare the marks as a whole, by their look, sound and idea, the way a buyer remembers them. They do not put two labels side by side and count the differences letter by letter.

The Supreme Court's 2001 decision in Cadila Health Care Ltd v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd sets out the factors that are still applied:

1. The nature of the marks: word marks, label marks or composite marks.
2. The degree of resemblance in sound, look and idea.
3. The nature of the goods on which the marks are used.
4. How similar the goods are in nature, character and performance.
5. The class of buyers likely to buy them, including their education, intelligence and the care they take.
6. How the goods are bought or ordered.
7. Any other surrounding circumstances.

For medicines, the same case says a stricter approach should be taken, because a mix-up can harm health. That case was a passing-off dispute between FALCIGO and FALCITAB, both medicines.

Three more Supreme Court cases show the test at work:

• In Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products (1959), GLUVITA was refused registration as too close to GLUCOVITA. The trade connection between glucose and biscuits added to the risk of confusion.
• In Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satyadeo Gupta (1962), LAKSHMANDHARA was held deceptively similar to AMRITDHARA because of the overall structure and sound of the names. Registration was still allowed, but limited to Uttar Pradesh, because the earlier owner had acquiesced in (put up with) the use. Delay has a cost, which is one reason to watch the journal.
• In Pernod Ricard India v. Karanveer Singh Chhabra (2025), the Court repeated that marks are not compared mechanically side by side, and held that a common laudatory word like "PRIDE" cannot be claimed on its own. It was not persuaded that LONDON PRIDE was deceptively similar to BLENDERS PRIDE.

Types of similarity, with examples

The examples below are made up for illustration.

Our similarity checker scores two names for sound-alike and look-alike similarity. It measures spelling and sound only, while courts also weigh the goods, the buyers and the overall impression, so a low score does not mean two marks are safe. Treat it as a first filter, not a legal opinion.

Does the trademark class matter?

Yes, but not in the way most people think. Section 11(1) asks whether the goods or services are identical or similar, not whether they share a class number.

• Same class, unrelated goods may not conflict. Class 9, for example, covers both phone cases and fire extinguishers.
• Different classes, related goods can conflict: coffee (class 30) and café services (class 43), or clothing (class 25) and clothing stores (class 35).
• Well-known marks get wider protection: a similar mark can be refused even for unrelated goods or services (Section 11(2)).

Use the class finder and our trademark class list to see which classes sit next to yours.

How to check if your brand name is deceptively similar

1. Search IP India's public search for your word in your class and related classes, including spelling variants.
2. Say it out loud. If it sounds like an existing brand in your field, a different spelling won't save you.
3. Translate it. Check the Hindi, English or regional-language equivalent.
4. Strip the extras. Remove words like "India", "Foods" or "Tech" and compare what's left.
5. Score it with the similarity checker.
6. Get advice from a registered trademark agent or advocate before you spend heavily on a name that is close to an existing one.

Common myths about similar trademarks

• "Changing one letter makes it safe." Not if the marks still sound or look alike.
• "My logo is different, so the name doesn't matter." Most buyers remember and ask for the name, not the logo.
• "Different class means no conflict." Related goods and services can still clash, and well-known marks are protected more widely.
• "I registered first, so I win." Not always. A business that used a similar mark earlier can have stronger rights, which is why dated proof of first use matters.
• "My brand contains a word, so nobody else can use that word." Not if it is a common or laudatory word. As the Pernod Ricard case shows, such words can't be claimed in isolation.

What to do about a deceptively similar mark

If the mark is in the Trade Marks Journal, you can oppose it within four months of publication. See how to oppose a trademark in India and check the estimated last date with the opposition deadline calculator. If your own application has been objected to on these grounds, read trademark objection vs opposition. If the other mark is already registered or being used in the market, you are looking at rectification or a court case, so speak to an advocate.

To catch the next one early, BrandKavach compares the marks in each new journal issue we receive against your brand and emails you about likely sound-alikes and look-alikes. Run a free check or start a watch.

General information only, not legal advice.

This guide is general information, not legal advice. Check dates in the official Trade Marks Journal and speak to a trademark agent or advocate about your own case.