Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANMOHAN, J.
Koninlijke Philips N.V. and Another - Appellant
Versus
Amazestore and Others - Respondent
Civil Suit (Comm) No. 737 & 1170 of 2016; Interlocutory Application No. 7469 of 2016, 2685 of 2017, 16768 of 2018
Decided on : 22-04-2019
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY - DESIGN - COPYRIGHT - PASSING OFF - INJUNCTION - DAMAGES - [ROYAL PHILIPS ELECTRONICS V. AMITKUMAR KANTILAL JAIN & ORS.] - The plaintiffs, Koninklijke Philips N.V. and Anr., filed two suits seeking a decree of damages and permanent injunction restraining violation of multiple statutory and common law rights, including piracy of registered design, infringement of copyright, and passing off of trade dress. The defendants, Nova Manufacturing Industries Limited (NOVA), Badri Electro Supply and Trading Company (BESTCO) LLC., and Omni Exim Private Limited, were identified as the primary sources of infringing products in India. The plaintiffs had obtained a consensual decree against the contesting defendants, including NOVA, in both suits, whereby the defendants were held bound by their statements to refrain from manufacturing, selling, or dealing in infringing products and to pay consolidated costs. However, the defendants continued to violate the injunction orders and engage in unauthorized activities. The plaintiffs amended their claims to include damages for the surviving defendants and presented evidence by way of affidavits. The court, after considering the arguments and evidence presented, concluded that the defendants had willfully and repeatedly infringed the plaintiffs' rights in their copyright, trade dress, and design. The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further infringement and awarded compensatory damages for the actual losses suffered by the plaintiffs. Additionally, the court awarded aggravated damages to punish the defendants for their mala fide conduct and deter them from repeating it. The plaintiffs were also entitled to costs of litigation, including lawyer's fees.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs, Koninklijke Philips N.V. and Anr., filed two suits seeking a decree of damages and permanent injunction restraining violation of multiple statutory and common law rights, including piracy of registered design, infringement of copyright, and passing off of trade dress. The defendants, Nova Manufacturing Industries Limited (NOVA), Badri Electro Supply and Trading Company (BESTCO) LLC., and Omni Exim Private Limited, were identified as the primary sources of infringing products in India. The plaintiffs had obtained a consensual decree against the contesting defendants, including NOVA, in both suits, whereby the defendants were held bound by their statements to refrain from manufacturing, selling, or dealing in infringing products and to pay consolidated costs. However, the defendants continued to violate the injunction orders and engage in unauthorized activities. The plaintiffs amended their claims to include damages for the surviving defendants and presented evidence by way of affidavits.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the arguments and evidence presented, concluded that the defendants had willfully and repeatedly infringed the plaintiffs' rights in their copyright, trade dress, and design. The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further infringement and awarded compensatory damages for the actual losses suffered by the plaintiffs. Additionally, the court awarded aggravated damages to punish the defendants for their mala fide conduct and deter them from repeating it. The plaintiffs were also entitled to costs of litigation, including lawyer's fees.
Issues: Whether the defendants had infringed the plaintiffs' rights in their copyright, trade dress, and design; Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further infringement; Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to damages for the actual losses suffered; Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to aggravated damages to punish the defendants for their mala fide conduct and deter them from repeating it; Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to costs of litigation, including lawyer's fees.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in Rookes v. Barnard, (1964) 1 AllER 367, and Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome, (1972) AC 1027, to determine the appropriate measure of damages in cases involving intellectual property infringement. The court held that the defendants' conduct warranted the payment of aggravated damages in favor of the plaintiffs, as their actions fell within the category of infringement that was deliberate and calculated, amounting to gangsterism, scamming, or mafia-like behavior, coupled with willful contempt of court.
Final Decision: The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from further infringement and awarded compensatory damages for the actual losses suffered by the plaintiffs. Additionally, the court awarded aggravated damages to punish the defendants for their mala fide conduct and deter them from repeating it. The plaintiffs were also entitled to costs of litigation, including lawyer's fees.
MANMOHAN, J.
Background
1. Present suits have been filed seeking decree of damages as well as permanent injunction restraining violation of multiple statutory and common law rights, namely:
a. Piracy of registered design number 253140 in CS(COMM) 737 of 2016. The prayer clause 49(i) of the said plaint is reproduced hereinbelow as the Plaintiffs have not pressed their reliefs for delivery up and rendition of accounts.:-
“49. In light of the above, it is therefore prayed before this Hon’ble Court that it may be pleased to pass the following reliefs:-
(i) An order for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their partners or proprietors, principal officers, servants, agents, distributors and all others acting on its behalf as the case may be from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any manner with health and personal care appliances products and/or any other goods and/or services (including on their own websites as well as third party websites) resulting in :
(a)Infringement of the Plaintiff’s design number 253140 as set out hereinabove;
(b) Unfair competition on part of the Defendants as set out hereinabove;”
b. Infringement of copyright and passing off of the trade-dress in CS(COMM) 1170 of 2016. The prayer clause 50(i) of the said plaint is reproduced hereinbelow as the Plaintiffs have given up their reliefs of delivery up and rendition of accounts as prayed for in paragraph 50(ii) and (iii) of the plaint:-
“50. In light of the above, it is therefore prayed before this Hon’ble Court that it may be pleased to pass the following reliefs:-
(i) An order for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their partners or proprietors, principal officers, servants, agents, distributors and all others acting on its behalf as the case may be from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any manner with health and personal care appliances products and/or any other goods and/or services (including on their own websites as well as third party websites) using the Plaintiff’s trade dress, copyright and any other mark deceptively similar thereto leading to:
Infringement of the Plaintiff’s copyright as set out hereinabove;
Passing off of the defendants’ impugned products as belonging to the Plaintiff by using trademarks, trade dress and copyright which are identical and/or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademarks, trade dress and copyright as set out hereinabove;
Unfair Competition on part of the Defendants as set out hereinabove;
2. On 18th March, 2019, with consent of the parties, present two suits, being Koninklijke Philips N.V. &Anr. vs Amitkumar Kantilal Jain &Ors., CS (COMM) 1170/2016 and Koninklijke Philips N.V. & Anr. vs Amaze Stores &Ors., CS (COMM) 737/2016, were consolidated.
3. Additionally, on the said date, this Court passed consensual decrees in both the suits against the contesting Defendants, i.e. Amitkumar Kantilal Jain, Nova Homes Appliances Pvt. Ltd., Nova Marketing Group, Amaze Stores, Mr. Hitesh Lunawath, Mr. Raju Lunawath, Million Lights and Mr. Ramesh Chand. The relevant portion of the order dated 18th March, 2019 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
“Mr. H.P. Singh, learned counsel for Amitkumar Kantilal Jain and Nova Homes Appliances Pvt. Ltd. states that the names of his clients have wrongly been mentioned on the products by way of a sticker by defendant no.7. He further states that he has no objection if CS(COMM) No.1170/2016 and CS(COMM) No.737/2016 are decreed in accordance with 50 (i) and 49 (i) of the plaints respectively.
Learned counsel for Nova Marketing Group, Amaze Stores, Mr. Hitesh Lunawath, Mr. Raju Lunawath, Million Lights and Mr. Ramesh Chand states that his clients tender their unconditional apology and are agreeable to pay consolidated costs of Rs.2,50,000/- in both the suits.
In view of
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
