Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J.
Sirona Hygiene Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Flipkart Internet Private Limited & Ors. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 368 of 2020
Decided On : 09-05-2023
Trademark Infringement - Civil Procedure - Section 151, Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC - Plaintiff sought injunction against infringement of its trademarks, passing off, rendition of accounts and damages. The court decreed in favor of the Plaintiff and against Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2. Judgment passed against Defendant Nos. 3 to 13 restraining them from passing off goods under the Plaintiff's trademarks.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff sought injunction against infringement of its trademarks, passing off, rendition of accounts and damages. Defendants were accused of infringing Plaintiff's intellectual property rights by wrongfully tagging traders/sellers on their e-commerce platforms, creating the impression that the counterfeit goods sold were the Plaintiff's goods.
Finding of the Court:
The court found in favor of the Plaintiff and decreed the suit against Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2. Judgment was also passed against Defendant Nos. 3 to 13 restraining them from passing off goods under the Plaintiff's trademarks.
Issues: Infringement of trademarks, passing off, rendition of accounts, damages, and violation of intellectual property rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decreed in favor of the Plaintiff based on the evidence presented and the failure of Defendants to file a written statement or appear in court. The judgment was passed under Order VIII Rule 10 of CPC against Defendant Nos. 3 to 13.
Final Decision: The suit was decreed in favor of the Plaintiff and against Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2. Judgment was also passed against Defendant Nos. 3 to 13 restraining them from passing off goods under the Plaintiff's trademarks.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)
I.A. 8909/2023 (joint application on behalf of Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 under Order XXIII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908)
1. Parties jointly pray for a compromise decree under Order XXIII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC"), on terms detailed in Paragraph 2 of the present application.
2. The application is duly supported by affidavits of the authorised representatives of Sirona Hygiene Private Limited (Plaintiff) and Flipkart Internet Private Limited (Defendant No. 1). Counsel for both parties confirm the compromise, and pray that the suit be decreed as per terms mentioned in Paragraph 2 of the application.
3. The Court has perused the terms of the compromise and finds the same to be lawful.
4. Accordingly, the present suit is decreed in favour of Plaintiff and against Defendant No. 1, in terms of paragraph No. 2 of the application, which shall form part of the decree.
5. Parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the compromise as recorded in the application.
6. Decree sheet be drawn up.
CS(COMM) 368/2020 & I.A. 7867/2020, I.A. 12262/2020
7. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking injunction against infringement of its trademarks, passing off, rendition of accounts and damages. The Plaintiff claims to be the proprietor of the registered trademarks such as "SIRONA", "BODY-GUARD" and "PEE-BUDDY" which are used for trade and business of products such as toiletries, personal care products and intimate hygiene products, details of which have been enumerated on Pages 27-33 of the plaint.
8. Plaintiff started as a partnership firm under the name & style of M/s First Step Projects, which was later reconstituted as First Step Digital Private Limited which took over the entire assets, rights, liabilities, obligations and other incidentals of the partnership firm. The name and style of First Step Digital Private Limited was subsequently changed to Sirona Hygiene Private Limited, the Plaintiff herein.
9. Plaintiff is engaged in business of manufacture, trade, marketing, and sale of toiletries, personal care products, intimate hygiene products and other goods and accessories relating to feminine hygiene and health. They sell their goods through wholesale, retail outlets and online sales conducted through e-commerce portals and platforms. Plaintiff has been awarded multiple awards by entities such as Economic Times, Fortune Magazine and Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (Government of India).
10. The grievance of the Plaintiff is that Defendants Nos. 3 to 14 fraudulently profess to sell the products of the Plaintiff and are wrongfully tagged onto the identification numbers and graphical user interfaces (GUIs) created by the Plaintiff on the platforms of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2, creating the impression that the counterfeit goods sold by Defendant Nos. 3 to 14 are the Plaintiff's goods. These actions constitute infringement of Plaintiff's intellectual property. The Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 facilitate, aid and abet the infringement of the rights of the Plaintiff by wrongfully tagging such traders/sellers on the identification numbers and Graphical User Interfaces. Defendant Nos. 3 to 10 (through Defendant No. 1) and the Defendant Nos. 11 to 13 (through Defendant No. 2) have been unlawfully tagged on the Graphical User Interfaces of the Plaintiff's products on their respective e-commerce portals. These Defendants make unlicensed use of copyrighted promotional material and their listing/tagging to sell to the consumers of the Plaintiff's products fake, sub-standard and cheap infringing copies. This leads to the commission of a string of other infringements and violations of laws including the infringement of the Plaintiff's copyright, design and patent rights; cheating and passing off fake goods in the guise of sale of its products, causing the exposure of the Plaintiff to unwarranted compla
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of intellectual property rights, specifically trademarks, and the legal provisions under Section 151 and Order XXIII Rule 3 of CP....
The court upheld the legality and binding nature of the settlement agreement in resolving the dispute between the parties.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademarks and copyrights under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957, and the court's power to grant injuncti....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the plaintiff to statutory protection and the grant of injunction for infringement under the Trademark Act, 1999.
E-commerce platforms must prevent unauthorized sellers from using trademarks, as this constitutes passing off under trademark law, thereby protecting intellectual property rights in the digital marke....
Trademark infringement and passing off established due to defendants' sale of counterfeit products, leading to a decree in favor of the plaintiff.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the plaintiff to a permanent injunction for passing off its mark 'SANDHI SUDHA' and the consideration of the defendants' non-rep....
Trademark infringement occurs when identical trademarks are used on counterfeit goods, leading to public confusion and deception.
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
