Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J.
Singh & Singh Law Firm L.l.p & Anr. - Appellantss
Versus
Singh & Singh Law, Pllc & Ors. - Respondents
CS (Comm) 300 of 2022
Decided On : 10-05-2022
Exemptions - Civil Procedure - Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Order 11 Rule 1(4) CPC - Section 12(A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC - Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Section 29(1), 29(2)(c) and 29(5) - [I.A. 7211/2022, 7212/2022 & 7311/2022, I.A. 7213/2022, I.A. 7214/2022, I.A. 7210/2022, I.A. 7215/2022, I.A. 7216/2022, CS (COMM) 300/2022, I.A. 7209/2022] - The court granted exemptions and allowed various applications under the Civil Procedure and Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court also granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, restraining the Defendants from using certain marks and names, based on the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiffs sought injunction against Defendants for using marks and names similar to theirs, alleging infringement and passing off. Plaintiffs provided evidence of their reputation and goodwill, and the court found that the Defendants' actions were likely to cause confusion and harm to the Plaintiffs.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad-interim injunction. The balance of convenience favored the Plaintiffs, and they were likely to suffer irreparable harm if the injunction was not granted.
Issues: The issues involved infringement and passing off of trademarks, and the grant of various applications under the Civil Procedure and Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the likelihood of confusion and harm to the Plaintiffs, the prima facie case made by the Plaintiffs, and the balance of convenience in their favor.
Final Decision: The court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using certain marks and names, and also granted various exemptions and applications under the Civil Procedure and Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
ORDER
I.A. 7211/2022, 7212/2022 & 7311/2022 (Exemptions)
1. Subject to the Plaintiffs filing originals, legal proceeding certificates, clearer copies, scanned copies, certified translations of files and documents with proper margins, which they may seek to place reliance on, within four weeks from today, exemption is granted.
2. Applications are allowed and disposed of.
I.A. 7213/2022 (Seeking exemption from filing documents in separate volumes)
3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
4. Application stands disposed of.
I.A. 7214/2022 (Section 12(A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation)
5. For the reasons stated in the application, the requirement of preinstitution mediation is dispensed with.
6. Application is allowed and disposed of.
I.A. 7210/2022 (seeking leave to file additional documents)
7. Present application has been preferred on behalf of the Plaintiffs seeking leave to file additional documents under Order 11 Rule 1(4) CPC.
8. Plaintiffs, if they wish to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
9. Application is allowed and disposed of.
I.A. 7215/2022 (For seeking leave to place audio-visual data in pen-drive)
10. By way of the present application, Plaintiffs seek leave to file a pendrive comprising of audio-visual data.
11. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
12. Plaintiffs are permitted to file the aforementioned pen-drive within a period of two weeks from today.
I.A. 7216/2022 (exemption from service to Defendants)
13. Since there is an urgency in the matter and the matter is being heard today, Plaintiffs are exempted from serving advance notice on Defendants.
14. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and disposed of.
CS (COMM) 300/2022
15. Let plaint be registered as a suit.
16. Upon filing of process fee, issue summons to the Defendants, through all permissible modes, returnable on 26.07.2022. Summons shall state that the written statement shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days from the receipt of summons. Along with the written statement, Defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the Plaintiffs.
17. Replication be filed by the Plaintiffs within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents filed by the Defendants, shall be filed by the Plaintiffs.
18. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
19. List before the Joint Registrar on 26.07.2022.
20. List before the Court on 19.09.2022.
I.A. 7209/2022 (under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, by Plaintiffs)
21. Present application has been preferred by the Plaintiffs under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 for grant of ex parte ad-interim injunction.
22. Issue notice to the Defendants, through all prescribed modes, returnable on 19.09.2022.
23. Present suit has been instituted by the Plaintiffs, aggrieved by the use of the name 'Singh & Singh', 'Singh & Singh Law', 'Singh & Singh Law, PLLC' and other derivatives, by Defendants No. 1 to 3. It is averred by the Plaintiffs that the name 'Singh & Singh' was coined in the year 1997 by its founders and the mark has been used continuously and uninterruptedly by the Plaintiffs, ever since. The Firm has, over the years, grown into a large and well-established firm in India, especially in the area of practice of Constitutional Law, Commercial Laws, Intellectual Property Laws, Media and Telecommunications Laws, Broadcasting, Arbitration, etc.
24. It is further averred that the trademark Singh & Singh, adopted in the year 1997, was registered as a trademark in 2005 as 'Singh & Singh Advocates'. Registration was sought in 2009 with respect to another mark 'Singh & Singh'. The trademarks were subsequently assigned to its current Proprietor
The main legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademarks and prevention of infringement and passing off, as well as the application of procedural rules under the Civil Procedu....
Trademark infringement claims must prevent confusion in the marketplace, emphasizing the necessity for injunctions when identical marks are used in overlapping services, particularly in a global cont....
A court will grant an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in a trademark infringement and passing-off suit where the plaintiff establishes a long-standing reputation, a prima facie case of deceptive simil....
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
