Keeping the above three principles in mind, the Delhi High Court concluded and injuncted the Defendants while further laying down four tests, that were to be satisfied for maintainability of a QTA. They are as follows:
a. The goods and services sold by the Defendant should be similar to that of Plaintiff’s, and such goods and services should likely cause confusion or deception;
b. That the Defendant’s intention was to override goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff;
c. That there is and was likelihood or reasonable probability of real or tangible damage or injury to the Plaintiff if the Defendant were to act; and
d. That the hardships faced by Plaintiff are greater than that of Defendant, if an injunction was to be rejected against the Defendant.
Source: Barandbench
