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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Jayant Nath, J.
Golden Tobie Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Golden Tobacco Limited - Respondent
CS(COMM) 178 of 2021
Decided On : 04-06-2021




A court can refer disputes to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act if a valid arbitration agreement exists, even if issues relate to non-arbitrable rights, provided they stem from contractual agreements.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 8 - Arbitration Agreement - Application filed by defendant for referring disputes to arbitration - Plaintiff seeks injunction against defendant regarding trademark usage and compensation for infringement - Issue of whether agreements could be terminated and disputes referred to arbitration is central - Court holds that the termination by defendant was valid and disputes are arbitrable under the agreement - Court refers parties to arbitration. (Paras 1-17)

(B) Arbitration - Scope and requirements - Arbitrability of disputes based on jurisdiction of courts and interpretation of agreements - Judicial authority can refer parties to arbitration unless it finds no valid arbitration agreement exists - Court’s jurisdiction is prima facie in nature, not to delve into merits of case. (Paras 10-12)

Table of Content
1. application for arbitration by defendant. (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of trademark license agreements. (Para 3 , 4)
3. defendant's contention on agreement termination. (Para 5 , 6)
4. arguments on arbitrability of disputes. (Para 8 , 9)
5. legal position on arbitration agreements. (Para 10 , 11)
6. in rem actions and arbitrability. (Para 12 , 13)
7. court's ruling on dispute arbitrability. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
8. order to refer parties to arbitration. (Para 17)

JUDGMENT

Jayant Nath, J.

IA No. 6080/2021

1. This is an application filed by the defendant under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for referring the disputes between the plaintiff and the defendant to arbitration.

2. The plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking the following reliefs:

    "(a) Decree for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, their partners, directors, shareholders or proprietor as the case may be, its assigns in business, franchisees, affiliates, subsidiaries, licensees and agents from selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly the exclusive brands as mentioned in Schedule-3 of the Trademark Licence Agreement dated 12.02.2020 and amendment to Trademark Licence Agreement dated 29.08.2020;

    (b) Decree for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, their partners, directors, shareholders or proprietor as the case may be, its assigns in business, franchisees, affiliates, subsidiaries, licensees and agents from selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any product, or reproducing or using in any manner whatsoever, the infringing exclusive brands as mentioned in Schedule-3 of the Trademark Licence Agreement dated 12.02.2020 and amendment to Trademark Licence Agreement dated 29.08.2020, which is identical to and/or deceptively similar;

    (c) Decree for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, their partners, directors, shareholders or proprietor as the case may be, its assigns in business, franchisees, affiliates, subsidiaries, licensees and agents from selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any product, or reproducing or using in any manner whatsoever, the infringing exclusive brands as mentioned in Schedule-3 of the trademark licence agreement dated 12.02.2020 and amendment to trademark licence agreement dated 29.08.2020, amounting to passing off of the goods/services and/or business of the Defendant for those of the Plaintiff, dilution of goodwill and unfair competition;

    (d) A decree for delivery up of all products and material including stationery, visiting cards, billboards, brochures, promotional material, letter-heads, cash memos, sign boards, sign posts, leaflets, cartons or any other items of whatsoever, bearing the infringing logo mark and the infringing trade dress, and/or any other mark, logo, device or trade dress which may be identical and/or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs well-known logomark and trade dress;

    (e) A decree of damages amounting to Rs.16,70,30,721.84 (Rupees Sixteen Crores Seventy Lakhs Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty-One and Eighty-Four Paise Only) or any such amount as found due in favour of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff submit that the valuation of damages is an approximate figure only, and the Plaintiff undertakes to pay further Court fee as may be determined by this Hon'ble Court upon the damages that the Plaintiff is able to prove in the course of trial;

    (f) An order for rendition of accounts of profits in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant to ascertain the profits made by Defendant through sale of its products or any other products which bear the infringing logo mark and the infringing trade dress. The Court fees as and when the accounts of profit are determined precisely and accurately in the course of trial, and upon disclosure of profits made by the Defendants;"

3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the parties entered into a Master Long Term Supply

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 Back to top