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
Sanjeev Narula, J.
Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited - Appellant
Versus
CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited - Respondent
CS(COMM) 628 of 2021
Decided On : 08-12-2021




Exclusive trademark rights can be enforced against infringement while mediation routes are prioritized for resolution in trademark disputes.

Headnote:(A) Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 12-A - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 - I.A. filed seeking temporary injunction relating to trademark infringement and passing off - Plaintiff sought to restrain Defendants from using the mark 'CROMPTON' - Court directed mediation, noting the parties' agreement on its possibility - Defendant No. 1 refuted claims of trading under Plaintiff's mark but agreed to communicate warnings to their partners against unauthorized use of the mark. (Paras 4, 15, 19, 21)

(B) Trademark Infringement - Plaintiff established exclusive trademark rights due to brand transfer agreements, thus holds significant standing against potential infringement - Defendant's compliance and denial of claim over the trademarks noted. (Paras 15, 18, 20)

Facts of the case:
The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants engaged in trademark infringement by marketing products under the trademark 'CROMPTON', despite the exclusive rights of the Plaintiff established through agreements regarding intellectual property. The Plaintiff presented communications with the Defendants and reported ongoing misuse of the trademark in promotional materials. The Defendants asserted they did not claim rights over the trademark but were advised to direct their partners to cease usage.

Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the potential for mediation and the commercial court’s mandate for compliance with procedural norms regarding mediation and pleadings. Requests for injunction not definitively ruled on pending mediation and pleadings.

Issues: The main issues included the application for a temporary injunction to prevent trademark infringement, the requirement for mediation, and the necessity of filings in compliance with court rules.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of mediation and preliminary compliance while underscoring the significance of the exclusive trademark rights held by the Plaintiff by virtue of written agreements, thus fostering an environment for resolution without immediate exhaustive litigation.

Result: Case adjourned for mediation and further proceedings.

Table of Content
1. conclusion on applications and future hearing dates. (Para 3 , 7 , 8 , 22 , 23)
2. mediation directive and compliance expectations. (Para 4 , 21)
3. procedural aspects of suit registration and notice issuance. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14)
4. trademark infringement and use disputes. (Para 15 , 16)
5. clarification on brand ownership post-demerger. (Para 17)
6. defense against trademark claims and assurance provided. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)

ORDER

[VIA HYBRID MODE]

I.A. No. 16106/2021 (seeking exemption from filing clearer copies and original documents)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Plaintiff shall file better copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.

3. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. No. 16107/2021 (seeking exemption from complying with the provisions of Section 12-A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015)

4. After some submissions, Senior Counsel for the parties, on instructions, state that mediation is certainly possible amongst the parties. Accordingly, the parties are directed to appear before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 13th December, 2021.

5. The Mediation Centre is requested to appoint Mr. Rajeev Virmani, Senior Counsel as the Mediator.

6. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. No. 16105/2021 (for appointment of a Local Commissioner u/Order XXVI, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.)

7. The application is not pressed.

8. Dismissed as not pressed.

CS(COMM) 628/2021

9. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

10. Issue summons. Ms. Isha Malik, counsel for Defendant No. 1, accepts summons. Upon filing of process fee, issue summons to Defendant No. 2, by all permissible modes. Summons shall state that the written statement shall be filed by the Defendants within a period of 30 days from the date when the mediation is concluded. Along with the written statement, the Defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without which the written statement shall not be taken on record.

11. Liberty is given to the Plaintiff to file a replication within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement. Along with the replication, if any, filed by the Plaintiff, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the Defendants, be filed by the Plaintiff, without which the replication shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.

12. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 11th February, 2022. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would be liable to be burdened with costs.

13. List before Court 14th January, 2022.

I.A. No. 16104/2021 (Application seeking temporary injunction against the Defendants u/Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of CPC, 1908)

14. Issue notice. Ms. Isha Malik, counsel for Defendant No. 1, accepts notice. Issue notice to Defendant No. 2, by all permissible modes, upon filing of process fee, returnable on 20th April, 2022.

15. The present suit relates to piracy/passing off/infringement of a registered design of the Plaintiff with respect to a submersible, mono-block and centrifugal pump that is registered under the Designs Act, 2000 under number 289880 dated 6th January, 2017. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants have fraudulently imitated the design by not only copying all the essential features of the Plaintiff's registered design, but also the entire get-up, layout, overall appearance and all the unique features.

16. Pending adjudication of the suit, Plaintiff seeks several reliefs in the instant application, including a relief of restraining Defendants and their dealers, distributors, stockiest, agents, associates and others acting on their behalf from advertising on internet or other mediums under the trade name "CROMPTON" and/or "CROMPTON GREAVES" - or any other such

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