High Court Of Delhi
DIPCHAND ARYA - Appellant
Versus
KIRAN SOAPWORKS - Respondent
Interim Application 2424 of 1980
Decided On : 01/07/1981
TRADEMARK - INFRINGEMENT - TRADE MARKS ACT, 1958 - COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957 - SIMILARITY OF TRADE MARKS AND WRAPPERS - INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT - INJUNCTION GRANTED.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff, a manufacturer and seller of washing soaps, sued the defendant for infringement of its registered trademark 'sinaula' and copyright in its wrapper. The defendant, who started its business later, used the trademark 'sindrela' and a wrapper similar to the plaintiff's.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the two trademarks and wrappers were visually and phonetically similar and that the defendant's use of the impugned trademark and wrapper was likely to deceive and confuse consumers. The court also found that the plaintiff had a prima facie case of infringement of trademark and copyright.
Issues: 1. Whether the defendant's use of the impugned trademark and wrapper constituted infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademark and copyright. 2. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the impugned trademark and wrapper.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the defendant's use of the impugned trademark and wrapper was likely to deceive and confuse consumers and that the plaintiff had a prima facie case of infringement of trademark and copyright. The court also held that the balance of convenience was in favor of the plaintiff and that an interim injunction was necessary to prevent irreparable injury to the plaintiff.
Final Decision: The court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the impugned trademark and wrapper.
( 1 ) IN this case both the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 are in the business of manufacture and sale of washing soaps. The plaintiff M/s. Deep Chand Arya Industries is in the trade since the year 1959. In April, 1976 the plaintiff adopted the trade mark sinaula in respect of their products. The trade mark sinaula of the plaintiff is registered under No. 314123 dated 19th April, 1976. The plaintiff is packing and marketing its products in the wrapper entitled sinaula . The wrapper used by the plaintiff is registered under the Copyright Act, 1957. According to the plaintiff. the colour scheme, get-up, lay-out and arrangement of the plaintiff s wrapper is an artistic work and the same is protected under the provisions of the Copyright Act.
( 2 ) THE defendant M/s. Kiran Soap Works came in the business of the manufacture and sale of washing soap in June 1979 and they are trading under the trade-mark sindrela and are packing and marketing their product in the wrapper entitled sindrela , The wrapper used by the defendants have same colour scheme, get up, lay out and arrangement as of the wrapper of the plaintiff.
( 3 ) THE case of the plaintiff is that the trade mark sindrela adopted by the defendant is deceptively similar to the mark of the plaintiff and it amounted to an infringement of the trade mark of the plaintiff and that further the defendants with a dishonest intention are packing and marketing their washing soaps in the wrapper sindrela which is an exact copy of the wrapper of the plaintiff and that the sale of the product of the defendants in the wrapper entitled sindrela is bound to confuse and deceive purchaser which include unwray class of purchasers such as housewives, washermen, servants, etc. The plaintiff further alleged that the sales of its products run into several lakhs of rupees and that the defendants, with mala fide intention and to exploit the reputation of the plaintiff, nave adopted the impugned trade mark and the wrapper.
( 4 ) THE plaintiff has along with the suit filed an application for grant of interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade mark sindrela and the wrapper entitled sindrela ,
( 5 ) THE defendants in their written statement pleaded that the trade mark sindrela is visually and phonetically different from the trade mark sinauala of the plaintiff and that there is also no similarity between the two wrappers and no person with a reasonable sense and proper eye sight could be deceived The defendants pleaded that they are using the mark sindrela since June, 1879 and that uptil July, 1980 they have sold goods approximately of the value of Rs. 18,000. 00 and their profit may be almost nothing.
( 6 ) THE grant of an injunction is a discretionary relief. There are three guiding factors which have to be kept in view in dealing with the relief of ad interim injunction and those factors are (i) the proof of a prima facie case ; (ii) the balance of convenience between the parties and (iii) whether the interim injunction if not granted will cause irreparable injury to the plaintiff.
( 7 ) AFTER hearing the counsels for the parties, and giving the case my very careful consideration, I am of the view that the above conditions are satisfied in this case and the application must be allowed.
( 8 ) THE plaintiff is manufacturing and selling washing soaps in the wrapper entitled sinaula since 1976. The plaintiff got its wrapper registered under the Copyright Act. The defendants came into the trade of manufacturing and selling washing soaps only in June, 1979 and according to the defendants uptil July, 1980 they had sold goods only of the value of about Rs. 18,000. 00. A comparison of the two wrappers sinaula and sindrela would reveal that the two wrappers are similar in size, colour scheme and get up ; the trade-marks sinaula and sindrela also are visually and phonetically confusing and deceiving. The two wrappers with the trade-marks sinaula
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.