Delhi High Court orders deletion of ‘Croose’ trademark, protecting Crocs from deceptive imitation. The mark was found likely to cause confusion due to its visual and phonetic similarity.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a crucial ruling for trademark protection in India, the Delhi High Court has ordered the deletion of the trademark registration for the mark ‘Croose’, finding it deceptively similar to the globally recognized footwear brand Crocs.
Background
Founded in 2002, Crocs is a US-based footwear company with a strong international presence. In India, Crocs registered its trademark between 2005 and 2006. The company approached the Delhi High Court to seek the cancellation of the ‘Croose’ trademark, which had been registered with the Registrar of Trademarks in India. Crocs argued that the mark ‘Croose’ not only resembled its own mark in lettering but also in placement, thereby misleading consumers and exploiting Crocs’ international reputation and goodwill.
Court’s Observations
On September 26, 2025, Justice Tejas Karia observed that the trademark ‘Croose’ was likely to cause confusion among consumers due to its visual and phonetic similarity with the established ‘Crocs’ mark.
The Court emphasized:
“The Impugned Mark (Croose) is hit by Section 11(1)(b) of the (Trademarks) Act, which prohibits registration of a Trade Mark that is deceptively similar to a Trade Mark, which is already on the register in respect of identical or similar goods.”
After comparing the products sold under both marks, the Court concluded that the registration of ‘Croose’ undermines the purity of the trademarks register and could mislead customers.
Court Ruling
The Delhi High Court directed the Trademark Registry to remove the mark ‘Croose’ from the register. Additionally, the Registrar’s website is to be updated within four weeks to reflect this change.
The Court formally stated:
“The present Petition is allowed and Respondent No. 1, the Trade Marks Registry is directed to remove the Impugned Mark ‘Croose’ bearing Registration No. 3409214 in Class 25 registered in the name of Respondent No.2 from the Register of Trade Marks.”
Interestingly, the opposing party, Croose, did not file any written submissions, though oral arguments were recorded during the hearings. Ultimately, the Court ruled in favor of Crocs, reinforcing the importance of protecting established trademarks from deceptive imitation.
Appearance:
For Crocs: Advocates Ajay Amitabh Suman, Shravan Kumar Bansal, Rishi Bansal, Deepak Srivastava, Shruti Manchanda and D Mehra
For Registrar of Trademarks: Advocates Ashish K. Dixit, Shivam Tiwari and Umar Hashmi
For Croose: Advocates Harshit Jain and Rahul Kumar
Case Title:
Crocs Inc Vs The Registrar Of Trademarks New Delhi & Anr.
C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 82/2023 & IA No.3113/2023
Read Judgment:
