IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
PRATIBHA RANI, PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, JJ.
Trans Tyres India Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Double Coin Holdings Ltd. And another - Respondent
FAO (OS) 296-97 of 2011
Decided on : 31-01-2012
Trademark Dispute - Interim Injunction - Territoriality Doctrine, Universality Doctrine, and Ownership of Goodwill - [Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 28, Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Section 202] - The court discussed the principles of the Territoriality Doctrine, Universality Doctrine, and Ownership of Goodwill in the context of a trademark dispute. It emphasized the importance of evidence in establishing ownership of goodwill and highlighted the significance of the relationship between the manufacturer and the seller in determining trademark proprietorship.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute between Double Coin Holding Ltd. and Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. regarding the use of the trademark 'Double Coin' in India. Trans Tyres claimed to have created a market for the goods and earned goodwill in the trademark, while Double Coin Holding Ltd. asserted its international reputation and ownership of the trademark.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prima facie case was in favor of Double Coin Holding Ltd. and against Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. It dismissed the appeal and emphasized that its discussion on facts was limited to determining the prima facie case, leaving the final decision to be based on the evidence presented.
Issues: The key issues included the establishment of goodwill in the trademark 'Double Coin' in India, the relationship between the manufacturer and the seller in determining trademark proprietorship, and the significance of evidence in establishing ownership of goodwill.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of evidence in establishing ownership of goodwill and highlighted the significance of the relationship between the manufacturer and the seller in determining trademark proprietorship.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, leaving the final decision on the merits of the rival claims to be decided based on the strength of the evidence presented. It also noted that the suit filed by Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. had been stayed due to a rectification petition filed by Double Coin Holding Ltd. to cancel the registration of the trademark 'Double Coin' obtained by Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd.
JUDGMENT :
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
CS(OS) No. 89/2011 has been registered on a plaint filed by Double Coin Holding Ltd. and ZAP CO Trading LCC as co-plaintiffs against Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. and its Director Mr. Harish Kakkar the two imp leaded as defendants No. 1 and 2 respectively; and surprisingly in spite of defendant No. 1 being described as a private limited company, Mr. Harish Kakkar has been described as its proprietor. During arguments in the appeal the parties referred to Mr. Harish Kakkar as the Director of defendant No. 1. A plaint, registered as CS(OS) No. 90/2011 has been filed by Satish Kakkar and Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. against Double Coin Holding Ltd. and ZAFCO Trading LCC in which Satish Kakkar has described himself as the Director of Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd.
2. The two suits are cross suits.
3. Cross applications seeking interim injunction in the two suits have been decided by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 20.04.2011 and since Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Satish Kakkar are the appellants, it is apparent that the interim injunction sought for by Double Coin Holding Ltd. and ZAFCO Trading LCC has been granted and the interim injunction sought for by Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Satish Kakkar has been declined.
4. The impugned judgment is fairly lengthy and runs into 73 pages.
5. We would prefer to be brief and would equally impress upon brevity by learned Trial Judges while deciding applications seeking interim injunction and leave the rest at the trial, for the reason a claim for interim injunction has to be decided on the well-known principles: (i) Whether the subject matter of the suit is such that the subject matter of the suit requires a status quo to be maintained; and if yes (ii) Whether the plaintiff has disclosed a prima-facie case i.e. triable issue arise which require evidence to resolve the same; (iii) Whether irreparable loss and injury shall be caused to the plaintiff if interim relief is declined; (iv) Where does the balance of convenience rests; (v) Whether due to delay or conduct of a negative kind, the plaintiff is disentitled to the equitable relief of interim injunction if on the first four counts noted the injunction ought to be otherwise granted.
6. As the Courts find themselves choked with docket explosion and current articles which are replete on issues of Court Management and Time Management cannot be ignored; and one important facet of time management is to restrict prolix arguments by counsel and then deal with the plethora of case law cited on the same point have to be kept in mind; we shall be brief.
7. While dealing with interim injunction, it would be a satisfactory order, if on the subject of prima facie case, the order simply reflects a crystallized statement of the law applied by the Judge with a brief reason for so holding, supported by an authority or two, (though even that may be avoided) followed by the facts which are culled out to be applied to the law for the purposes of concluding on the prima facie nature of the two versions. The discussion could then proceed to discuss the other four elements pertaining to grant or refusal of interim injunction.
8. We intend to do so.
9. As per the pleadings of Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. in the suit filed by it, which pleadings also constitute the defense set up by it in the suit filed by Double Coin Holding Ltd., it is pleaded that Double Coin Holding Ltd. manufactures tyres at its factory in China; and ZAFCO Trading LCC is its agent having liaison office set up for the first time in Delhi around May 2010. (It be highlighted by us that ZAFCO Trading LCC is established in UAE as per the case pleaded by Double Coin Holding Ltd. and ZAFCO Trading LCC.) It is further pleaded by Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd. that it was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of tyres and tubes as also sale of truck rims and lubes i.e. products in the automobile sector and that it started importing the tyre
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.