Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. MURALIDHAR, I.S. MEHTA, JJ.
Clues Network Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Loreal - Respondent
Regular First Appeal (Os)(Comm) No. 1, 5 of 2019, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 1287, 4866 of 2019
Decided On : 04-04-2019
Trademark Infringement - Intellectual Property Rights - Information Technology Act, 2000 - Order XIII-A CPC - Summary Judgment
Fact of the Case:
The case involved two appeals arising from a common set of facts, where the Plaintiff sought permanent injunctions against the Defendants for trademark infringement and violation of intellectual property rights. The suits were decreed against the Defendants, and the Appellant filed appeals challenging the judgments.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the learned Single Judge had dispensed with the necessary stages of framing of issues and recording of evidence as mandated by the CPC and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, without proper application of Order XIII-A CPC for summary judgment. The Court held that the findings and directions issued against the Appellant were beyond the scope of the suits and were rendered without following the procedure established by law.
Issues: The main issues were whether the learned Single Judge could dispense with the stages of framing of issues and recording of evidence, and whether the findings and directions issued against the Appellant were beyond the scope of the suits.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the learned Single Judge could not dispense with the necessary stages of the trial without proper application of the law, and the findings and directions issued against the Appellant were beyond the scope of the suits and were rendered without following the procedure established by law.
Final Decision: The final judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge in both suits were set aside, and the suits were restored to the file of the learned Single Judge for further proceedings.
S. Muralidhar, J.
These two appeals arise out of a common set of facts, involve the same Appellant and give rise to the same questions of law and are accordingly being disposed of by this common judgment.
RFA (OS) (COMM) 1/2019
2. This appeal is directed against an order dated 12th November, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(COMM) No. 980/2016 and IA No. 24186/2014.
3. The said suit was filed by the Respondent (Plaintiff) (L'OREAL) against M/s Brandworld (Defendant No.1) and the present Appellant (Defendant No.2). The suit was for permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from using manufacturing, marketing, stopping, selling, displaying, advertising through internet on the online market place through the website of the present Appellant i.e. www.Shopclues.com, using the Plaintiff's trademark L'OREAL with or without the word Paris or any other word/mark which will be identical with or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's said trademark L'OREAL in relation to their impugned use of business and cosmetics and other related/light products or from doing any act amounting to infringement of the Plaintiff's registered trademark, passing off or violation of the Plaintiff's rights in the said trademark violating its proprietary rights and infringing its copyright in the L'OREAL label.
4. When the suit was first listed for hearing on 14th October, 2014 an ex-parte injunction was passed in I.A. No. favour of the Plaintiff under O 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC). Thereafter, the present Appellant filed an application being IA 10325 of 2015 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 seeking vacation of the interim order. It was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 18th May 2015 observing as under:
"In the opinion of this Court, it cannot be a matter of chance that so many counterfeit products are being sold on the applicant/defendants website. Consequently, this Court is of the view that no grant for vacation of stay has been made out. "
5. Thereafter, an application was filed by the Appellant under Order XIII-A CPC which was dismissed as withdrawn on 23rd February, 2017 with liberty to file a fresh application. However, on 11th May, 2017 the Court noted that the present Appellant decided not to file a fresh application under Order XIII-A CPC.
6. Admission/Denial of documents was thereafter carried out. The suit was listed before the learned Single Judge dated 24th July, 2018 for case management. On that date, none appeared for Defendant No.1. The learned Single Judge noted that submissions were addressed on 24th July, 2018 on behalf of the Plaintiff and the present Appellant and both counsel have "no objection if the suit is disposed of finally". Thereafter orders were reserved and the impugned judgment was passed on 12th November, 2018 decreeing the suit against the present Appellant.
7. The learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment came to the following conclusions:
"(a) Shopclues.com is directed with immediate effect, to disclose the complete details of all its sellers, their addresses and contact details on its website;
(b) Shopclues.com is directed to obtain a certificate from its sellers that the goods are genuine;
(a) Prior to uploading a product bearing the Plaintiffs marks, it shall notify the plaintiff and obtain concurrence before offering the said products for sale on its platform;
(b) Shopclues.com enter shall into a proper agreement with its various sellers, under which it shall obtain guarantee as to authenticity and genuinity of the products as also provide for consequences of violation of the same.
(c) Upon being notified by the Plaintiff of any counterfeit product being sold on its platform, it shall notify the seller and if the seller is unable to provide evidence that the product is genuine, it shall take down the listing and notify the plaintiff of the same, as per the Intermediary Guidelines, 2011;
(d) It shall also seek a guarantee from the sellers that the product has not been impair
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
