HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT

IA No.12828/2009

1. This order will dispose of an application IA 12828/2009 whereby the defendants seek dismissal of this suit for injunction.

2. The plaintiff in this suit seek permanent injunction to restrain the defendants or their representatives from using selling, soliciting, exporting, displaying, or advertising their goods and the sale of various kinds of cosmetics and personal care products under the trademark “VOV”, which the plaintiff owns. It is contended that the plaintiff company honestly coined and conceived and started using the trademark “VO5” and “VO5 along with the term ALBERTO”, which is its name. The plaintiff companys name is depicted in small letters about the letter V. The plaintiff has produced photographs depicting its trademark. It claims to be using the Mark continuously since 1955 as its proprietor and have built a valuable trade goodwill and reputation in respect of such products under the trademark in question. The suit averments are also that the trademark “Alberto VO5” is registered since 30th May, 1960. It is claimed that the initial registration was renewed periodically and the renewal subsists as on date. The plaintiff also asserts that in addition it has filed applications for registration is of the “VO5 no-go” and the word mark “VO5” in class three (3), which are pending. Besides, the plaintiff claims to be the holder of copyright registration in being the owner of the original artistic work and Mark.

3. The plaintiff relies upon copies of its annual report and the consolidated statements of earnings, consolidated balance sheets, statements of cash flow etc., in respect of several years to contend that it has built an enviable reputation and goodwill for its products which are widely known and sold throughout the world including India. It is also asserted besides that the plaintiff has been regularly and continuously advertising its products in promoting them throughout the world, and India, through print, audiovisual media alike; for the purpose of which, states the plaintiff it advertises the products with the mark in numerous leading newspapers magazines and so on that are widely circulated and read throughout the world. The plaintiff claims to be one of the largest companies in the world engaged in the business of manufacture, distribution and sale of the goods in question i.e. cosmetics and personal care products. It is stated that the plaintiff is global manufacturer and marketer; and in 1990 itself it had six integrated profit centers and two key support groups, which were increasing over the years. The plaintiff claims to maintain excellence in quality of its goods and products, laying tremendous stress and emphasis on innovation to consistent research and development efforts, on which considerable amounts are spent. It is asserted that the plaintiff has consistently improved the quality of its products and services with a view to enhance customer satisfaction as well as increase its profits.

4. In India, according to the plaintiff its goods are sold through an exclusive licensee, namely M/S Alberto-Culver International Inc. in all territories of the world, except the United States of America; a License and know-how agreement with the said concern dated 1992 is relied upon. The plaintiff contends that defendants are engaged in sale of similar products i.e. trade, in various types of cosmetics and personal care goods; it is contended that the third defendant is its manufacturer. According to the plaintiff the third defendant has adopted the trademark VOV, as its logo as well as part of its corporate name and is using it for the sale of its goods and products. The third defendant, -VOV Cosmetics Co. Ltd., (referred to hereafter as “third defendant”) markets and sells the impugned goods through the first and second defendants in Delhi, according to the plaintiff beside other parts of India. It is asserted that the defendants are not propri