IMPORTANT POINT
Each act of trademark infringement constitutes a fresh cause of action, allowing the aggrieved party to file a new suit for ongoing violations.

JUDGMENT :

MINI PUSHKARNA, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, read with Order XLI Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), against the judgment dated 30th January, 2023 passed by the learned District Judge, Commercial Court-03, Shahdara, District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in suit, i.e. CS(COMM) 395/2020.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is the registered proprietor of the trademark and copyright SUPREME/ etc. in relation to manufacturing and marketing of pipes, PVC, tubes, hoses, etc.

3. It is submitted that the appellant had earlier filed a suit, i.e., COMIP (L) No. 1774/2018 against the respondent herein, which culminated in judgment dated 18th January, 2019, passed by the Bombay High Court. Respondent herein was earlier found guilty of infringing the registered mark of the appellant herein, i.e., SUPREME, by use of the infringing mark “SUPREME TECH”. Thus, vide judgment dated 18th January, 2019, the Bombay High Court decreed the suit in favour of the appellant, herein.

4. It is submitted that subsequently, the respondent herein, was found to again infringe the registered mark of the appellant, i.e., SUPREME, by use of the infringing mark, i.e., SUPREME WATERLINE. Therefore, a fresh suit, i.e., the second suit was filed by the appellant herein, i.e., CS(COMM) 395/2020.

5. However, it is submitted that the second suit filed by the appellant herein has wrongly been dismissed by the learned District Judge, Commercial Courts vide impugned judgment dated 30th January, 2023, by holding that the appellant herein ought to have filed a contempt petition and the suit was not maintainable. Further, the learned District Court held that there was no cause of action for filing a fresh suit. Thus, the suit of the appellant herein was dismissed by the learned Commercial Court by imposing a cost of Rs. 3,00,000/-.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the second suit was filed on a fresh cause of action, as despite the earlier suit having been decreed in favour of the appellant, the respondent herein had committed fresh infringement of the mark of the appellant herein, by using a new mark, “SUPREME WATERLINE”.

7. He further submits that the cause of action for the second suit arose on 15th July, 2020, whereas, the first suit was disposed of in January, 2019.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant further submits that the first suit had only been filed with respect to infringement of the trademark and passing of, whereas, in the second suit, additional prayer for infringement of copyright was also prayed by the appellant.

9. He further relies upon the judgments to show that in case of infringement, a fresh cause of action arises every time infringement is made by the other party. He, thus, submits that the suit of the appellant herein has wrongly been dismissed by the learned Commercial Court.

10. None appears for the respondent despite service.

11. This Court notes that even in the suit proceedings, the respondent herein did not cause appearance, despite service. Thus, the right of the respondent herein, to file written statement in the said suit, was closed.

12. This Court notes that the first suit that was filed by the appellant herein, was with respect to infringement of the mark of the appellant by the respondent herein, by using the infringing mark “SUPREME TECH”.

13. The said suit filed by the appellant herein was filed in the Bombay High Court, which was disposed of by the Bombay High Court vide judgment dated 18th January, 2019, in the following manner:

“1. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the Plaintiff and Defendant, the following Order is passed by consent:

i. The above Suit is decreed in terms of prayer Clauses (a), (b), (c) and which are reproduced hereunder:

“(a) the Defendant by himself, his servants, agents, stockists, dealers, assignees and all those connected with