Esaf Small Finance Bank Ltd vs Saaf Capit Federation — 100001/2023

Case under Trade Marks Act Section 134. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 27th June 2026.

OS Trd.Mrk - TRADE MARKS

CNR: KLTR010015232023

Issues

Next Hearing

27th June 2026

e-Filing Number

21-03-2023

Filing Number

100458/2023

Filing Date

23-03-2023

Registration No

100001/2023

Registration Date

24-03-2023

Court

District And Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur

Judge

5-Additional District Court-II/Vigilance Judge,Thrissur

Acts & Sections

TRADE MARKS ACT Section 134
Civil Procedure Code Section OrdVII,Rule1

Petitioner(s)

Esaf Small Finance Bank Ltd

Adv. GEOFY GEORGE P

Respondent(s)

Saaf Capit Federation

Esaf Foundation

Adv. Jijo Anto

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Additional District Court-II/Vigilance Judge,Thrissur

01-06-2026

Issues

16-03-2026

Issues

16-02-2026

Issues

16-12-2025

No sitting notified

05-11-2025

Issues

Interim Orders

06-07-2023
Order
06-07-2023
Order

Case Summary: 100001/2023 Outcome: Petition dismissed (temporary injunction denied). ESAF Small Finance Bank sought a temporary injunction against SAAF Capit Federation for alleged trademark infringement and passing off. The District Court of Thrissur found no prima facie case for infringement. The court determined that despite minimal overlap in the letters "SAF/SAAF," the trademarks were distinctly different in visual presentation, color, emblems, and phonetic pronunciation, falling short of "deceptive similarity" under trademark law. Additionally, the parties' financial services activities were sufficiently different to avoid customer confusion. The petition was dismissed on July 6, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 100001/2023 Outcome: Petition dismissed (temporary injunction denied). ESAF Small Finance Bank sought a temporary injunction against SAAF Capit Federation for alleged trademark infringement and passing off. The District Court of Thrissur found no prima facie case for infringement. The court determined that despite minimal overlap in the letters "SAF/SAAF," the trademarks were distinctly different in visual presentation, color, emblems, and phonetic pronunciation, falling short of "deceptive similarity" under trademark law. Additionally, the parties' financial services activities were sufficiently different to avoid customer confusion. The petition was dismissed on July 6, 2023. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District And Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thrissur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case