Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Louis Vuitton Malletier – Appellant
Versus
Javed Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Plaintiff-Louis Vuitton Malletier is a French company, having its registered office at 2 Rues du Pont-Neuf, 75001-Paris, France. Its history traces back to 1854 and the mark `LV' has since become well known. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing and selling high quality and high value luggage, handbags, wallets, footwear and fashion accessories for both women and men. It is a part of the Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy (LVMH) group that owns over 75 prestigious brands with a retail network of over 5,000 stores worldwide and revenue of 44.7 Billion Euros as of 2020. In India, the Plaintiff's registration of the LV Marks are as follows:
| Date | Registration No. | Mark |
| 8th August, 1985 | 441451 |  |
| 8th August, 1985 | 441452 |  |
| 8th August, 1985 | 441453 |  |
| 20th December, 2000 | 978462 |  |
| 20th December, 2000 | 978464 |  |
| 26th November, 2014 | 3054827 |  |
| 4th February, 2016 | 3177009 |  |
3. The Defendant No. 1-Javed Khan, is a wholesale supplier of footwear and menswear under the business name Jay Kay Sales. Defendant No. 2-Bilal Khan, is a listed entrepreneur on IndiaMart, who along with Defendant No. 1 runs the busines
The court recognizes the protection of registered trademarks against infringement and allows parties to settle disputes amicably, subject to conditions ensuring non-use of the original mark.
Establishment of statutory and common law rights over trademarks, infringement, passing off, and grant of remedies.
The court affirmed the well-known status of the plaintiff's trademarks and granted permanent injunction against defendants for infringement and passing off.
Trademark infringement and passing off under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and the seriousness of counterfeiting in eroding brand value and misleading consumers.
Infringing activities and lack of defense by the Defendant can lead to the award of damages and costs in favor of the Plaintiff.
The plaintiff failed to establish exclusive rights over the common name 'VASUNDHRA', resulting in dismissal of the injunction application due to lack of a prima facie case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that delay in instituting a suit, suppression of material documents, lack of evidence, and significant differences between the marks can be fatal t....
The delay in instituting the suit is fatal to the case of the plaintiff. The plaintiff had not even whispered about the reply notice issued by the defendant. This is very crucial since the defendants....
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
