Karnataka High Court
Kirloskar Proprietary Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Kirloskar Dimensions Pvt.Ltd - Respondent
Decided On : 06-14-96
passing-off - kirloskar - Companies Act, 1956, Trade Marks and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - The plaintiffs, belonging to the well-known Kirloskar group of Companies, filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the word 'kirloskar' as part of the 1st defendant's corporate name and trading style. The trial court declined to grant an order of temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs appealed against this decision. The court held that once reputation is established, fraudulent intention need not be proved in a passing-off action. However, the court declined to grant an order of temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, considering the balance of convenience and the fact that the defendants had already commenced their business and any interruption in their business would force them to close down their establishment. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within one year.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs, belonging to the well-known Kirloskar group of Companies, filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the word 'kirloskar' as part of the 1st defendant's corporate name and trading style. The trial court declined to grant an order of temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that once reputation is established, fraudulent intention need not be proved in a passing-off action. However, the court declined to grant an order of temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, considering the balance of convenience and the fact that the defendants had already commenced their business and any interruption in their business would force them to close down their establishment.
Ratio Decidendi: Once reputation is established, fraudulent intention need not be proved in a passing-off action. However, the court declined to grant an order of temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, considering the balance of convenience and the fact that the defendants had already commenced their business and any interruption in their business would force them to close down their establishment.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within one year.
( 1 ) THIS appeal is against the order dated 11-l l-1994 passed by the l3th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, on IA-A in OS No. 971 / 1993.
( 2 ) THE parties will be referred to in the course of this judgment as they are arrayed before the trial Court.
( 3 ) THE plaintiffs have filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the word "kirloskar" as part of the first defendant's corporate name and/trading so as to pass off or enable others to pass off the first defendant's goods and/ or business as that of the plaintiffs or in some what connected with the plaintiffs and the Kirloskar group of Companies and for damages. In the said suit the plaintiffs have filed an application seeking for temporary injunction restraining the defendants, by themselves, their agents, and/ or any other person claiming under them or through, between, or any of the public from using the word "kirloskar"as part of the 1st defendant's corporate name and/ or trading style so as to pass off or enable others to pass off the first defendant's goods and or business as that of the plaintiffs or in the same way connected with the plaintiffs pending disposal of the suit. The defendants resisted the said application. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court by its order dated 11-11-1994 dismissed the application on IA-I filed by the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the said order the plaintiffs have preferred this appeal.
( 4 ) THE facts leading to this appeal are:-The plaintiffs-l, 3 and 4 are the Companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act, 1956) and plaintiffs-2, 5 and 6 are existing companies within the meaning of Section 3 of the Companies Act. The plaintiffs belong to the well known Kirloskar group of Companies. The word 'kirloskar' forms part of the corporate name of each of the plaintiffs. Plaintiff No. 1 is the registered and recorded holder of the various trade marks as stated in Annexure-1. The said trade marks are the properties of the plaintiff-1 Company. Plaintiff-1 is also the recorded holder of the artistic word "kirloskar" in English (two different artistic words) Hindi and Marathi and the same are registered under the Copyright Act, 1957. Plaintiffs-2, 5 and 6 are the licencees and registered users of the various trade marks held,. possessed and owned by plaintiff-1 and the said licences are used in the said trade marks in relation to the products manufactured and marked by them. The further case of the plaintiff is that the word "kirloskar" forms integral part of the corporate name of the plaintiffs and all other Kirloskar group of Companies. In the year 1691 the erstwhile State of Savantwadi granted the rights of "mahajan", "gaokar" and "kulkarni" of the places of "kirlosi" in Malvan taluka to the one Mr. Krishna Bhat. Since then the surname Konar was changed to Kirloskar. One Mr. Lakshman Rao Kashinath Kirloskar the founder of the group commenced business of bicycle repairs on a small scale in the year 1888 along with is elder brother Ramuanna at Belgaum. They had shifted to Kundal in the erstwhile Aundh State. The name of Kundal was later on changed as Kirloskarwadi as the activities of the founder of the Kirloskar group of Companies and their business were located in Kundal. The change of name showed the reputation acquired by the founders and the association of Kirloskar with the business of the said founders. In 1920, the Kirloskar group converted their business into a public limited Company when public shareholders came into being. It was manufacturing fodder cutters and iron ploughs initially and in course of time the business was expanded to other diverse business.
( 5 ) ACCORDING to the plaintiffs, the word "kirloskar" expressed on any particular product connotes and denotes distinct reputation and eminence and goodwill associated with the quality of products manufactured, marketed and serviced and otherwise dealt with by the plaintiffs. The trade m
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.