SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Del) 458

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
SMITHKLINE BICHAM – Appellant
Versus
SUNIL SINGHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BINNI KALRA, H.A.AHMADI, PRAVIN ANAND, PUJA SHARMA, RAMESH KESWANI, V.P.Singh

VIKRAMJIT SEN

( 1 ) BY way of a present Objection, the Defendant No. 2 has challenged the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The Plaintiffs have filed this suit for the grant of a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from infringing its Trademark and Copyright and also for Passing-Off- The Plaintiff is the proprietor of the Trade Mark PANADOL and PANADOL EXTRA, which is admittedly an invented word. It has been registered in Class 5 of the Fourth Schedule to the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Marks Act) with effect from 21/10/1982 in favour of the Plaintiff. On 7/9/1999 the following ex parte ad interim orders were granted:

"i. A. No. 8797/99 notice for 31/1/2000. The plaint and this application discloses that the Plaintiff is the registered owner of the mark PANADOL and has spent Millions of Pounds on its advertisement and promotion since 1994. Its turn over in this period 1994-1998 is approximately 170 million Pounds. The concerned Cartons have been filed and on a perusal of the offending Carton of "paramol extra" and "pamacol", it is quite evident that the Defendants are attempting to not only infringe the plaintiff s trade ma
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top