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

2004 Supreme(Mad) 709

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.V.Balasubramanian and K.P.Sivasubramaniam, JJ.
Jolen Inc., 25, Walls Drive, Fairfield, Connecticut, USA., represented by its Constituted Attorney, Mr.A.Arulselvan
Versus
Shobanlal Jain and others
O.S.A.No.259 to 261 of 2000
Decided On : 30 April 2004

Advocates:
T.R.Rajagopalan, Senior Counsel, for A.A.Mohan, for Appellant.
Miglani, for M/s.Menon & Goklaney, for Respondent Nos.1 to 4.

Court of India has jurisdiction to initiate action.

Headnote:Trade Marks Act, 1999-Section 11-Infringement of trade mark and passing off action-Trade Mark of Plaintiff registered in USA-Plaintiff establishing trans-border reputation of its goods in India through advertisements in India-Held, action can be instituted in India.

N.V.Balasubramanian, J.: These appeals are preferred by the appellant against the common order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in O.A.Nos.553 and 554 of 2000 and Application Nos.2558 to 2560 of 2000 in C.S.No.397 of 2000 dated 14.8.2000. By the said common order, the learned Judge vacated the interim injunction already granted and dismissed O.A.Nos.553 and 554 of 2000 and allowed the two applications filed by the respondents to vacate the interim injunction in Application Nos.2559 and 2560 of 2000. Learned Judge also allowed the application No.2558 of 2000 filed to revoke the leave granted to the appellant/plaintiff. Hence, there are three appeals filed against the order in O.A.Nos.553 and 554 of 2000 and Application No.2558 of 2000.

2. The appellant herein filed the suit on the file of this Court in C.S.No.397 of 2000. Along with the suit, two applications in O.A.Nos.553 and 554 of 2000 were filed for the relief of interim injunction restraining the respondents from indulging in any action amounting to infringement of the appellant’s copyright in the artistic work JOLEN crSme bleach carton, container and JOLEN written in distinctive script and also restraining the respondents from passing off their goods as the goods of the appellant. This Court granted interim injunction by order dated 19.6.2000. Thereafter the respondents filed counter affidavit along with two applications in Application Nos.2559 and 2560 of 2000 to vacate the interim injunction. Learned Judge, by order dated 14.8.2000 dismissed the applications preferred by the appellant for injunction and consequently allowed the applications preferred by the respondents to vacate the injunction and also revoked the leave granted to the plaintiff to institute the suit.

3. The case of the appellant is that the appellant is carrying on the business of manufacture and selling of cosmetics including crSme bleach to pale hair. It is stated that the appellant was established in the year 1955 in United States of America and it started business with the trademark, JOLEN. According to the plaint, the appellant’s crSme bleach sold under the trademark JOLEN is used to lighten/decolour facial hair, hair on the arms, legs and any other parts of the body that a person desires to bleach. It is stated that the appellant’s JOLEN crSme bleach is sold in a bluish green carton with white lettering and the trademark JOLEN is written in an unique and highly distinctive stylized script wherein the initial “j” appears in small alphabet but in the same size as the remaining letters of JOLEN. It is also stated that a white line runs atop the entire length of the letters JOLEN and the trademark JOLEN in stylized script in bluish green colour appears within a white oval on the top of the carton. It is further stated that the trademark JOLEN in stylized script in white lettering with the words ‘CRTME BLEACH and lightens excess dark hair’ appears on the front and back of the cartons with bluish green background. It is stated that the containers inside the carton are white plastic containers of a distinctive shape with the trademark JOLEN in stylized script and the words CRTME BLEACH. It is stated that the appellant’s trademark JOLEN is an invented word derived from the names of its founders, JOHN and EVELYN and the letters JO were taken from JOHN and the letters LEN were taken from EVELYN and the trademark JOLEN also forms predominant part of the corporate name and trading style JOLEN Inc. It is stated that the appellant’s trademark JOLEN is registered in respect of crSme bleach in the united Sates of America and in several countries all over the world including Austria, Australia, Baharain, Cyprus, Fiji, France, Greece, Hong Kong, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, New Zealand, Netherlands, Panama, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Sultanate of Oman, Sweden, Turkey and United Arab Emirates (UAE). In the plaint, the appellant has also given the sales tur


































































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top