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

2019 Supreme(Del) 1325

PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Bata India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Chawla Boot House – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Neeraj Grover, Adv., Anmol Chadha, Adv., Rudrarti Kaur, Adv., S.K. Bansal, Adv., Pankaj Kumar, Adv., Somnath, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

I.A. 3051/2019 (u/Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC) and I.A. 3686/2019 (u/Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC)

1. The present order disposes of two applications being under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC and under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.

2. The Plaintiff - Bata India Limited (hereinafter "Plaintiff") has filed the present suit seeking an injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, unfair competition, damages, etc. The facts as essential for the present order are narrated below.

Plaintiff's case

3. The Plaintiff is a well-known manufacturer and seller of footwear. It was incorporated in 1931 in the name of its predecessor - Bata Shoe Company Private Limited. In the year 1973, it became a Public Limited Company, and changed its name to M/S Bata India Ltd. It adopted the mark 'POWER' for footwear in the early 1970s and the same has been in continuous use for almost 50 years. The 'POWER' brand is registered in favour of the Plaintiff, both in word form and logo form and as a combination with other marks. The 'POWER' range of footwear of "BATA" have been



































































































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