Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
JYOTI SINGH
Anil Rathi – Appellant
Versus
Jaipur Steeltech India Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trade mark license granted and cancelled (Para 1) |
| 2. parties' arguments on trademark usage and licensing (Para 3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's approval of undertakings (Para 5 , 10) |
| 4. court fees refund entitlement (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. disposition of the suit (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)
1. An affidavit of undertaking dated 10.11.2022 has been filed by Mr. Ghasi Lal Chaudhary, one of the Directors of Defendant No. 2, relevant portion of which reads as under:
"2. I say that on 15.09.2017, the defendant No. 2 company namely Nirman Infra Steel Pvt. Ltd. was granted a license for use of the Trade Mark "RATHI" as owned by Trust Rathi Foundation. This license was granted by Sh. Raj Kumar Rathi the Senior Trustee of the Group Cl of the Trust Rathi Foundation duly followed by the terms and conditions of the MOU dated 24.06.1995 and Trust Deed dated 26.06.1995 of the Trust Rathi Foundation. The documents relating to grant of the said license are already form part of the records of this case.
3. I further say that in and around August 2019 the defendant No. 2 stopped manufacturing all products i.e. steel bars bearing Trade mark "RATHI" and thereafter vide let
Court emphasizes the significance of written undertakings in trademark disputes and validates the necessity of compliance with contractual agreements before issuance of licenses.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant No.1, as a lineal male descendant of late G.D. Rathi, was bound by the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding (....
The court emphasized the concurrent right of registered proprietors of the mark RATHI, the validity of the Trademark Agreements, and the permitted use of the mark. It also highlighted the plaintiff's....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and the principles enunciated in several judgments to determine the necessity of impleadin....
The court determined that the members/trustees of the Rathi Research Centre are necessary parties to the trademark suit for effective adjudication under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure....
The court issued a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using the plaintiff's trademark and ordered the defendant to change its company name based on the defendant's undertaking.
Intellectual Property - Infringement of registered trade mark - Modify interim order - Subject to defendants filing an undertaking of their directors to abide by terms and conditions of undertaking a....
The court upheld the Defendant's commitment to withdraw contested trademarks, ruling that nominal sales negate the need for damages, granting a decree in favor of the Plaintiffs.
Defendant's discontinuation of impugned products and filing of affidavit led to the decree of the suit
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
