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 to the plaintiff's case in a trademark infringement and passing off action.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: This Civil Suit is filed under Order VII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code read with Section 105 7 106 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act 1958 and Sections 55 and 62 of the Copy Right Act, praying for a Judgment and Decree against the defendant for the following reliefs:

(a) granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from, in any manner, infringing the plaintiff registered Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’; and with the device of lock by using the offending Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock or any other mark or marks which are similar or in any way deceptively similar to or a colourable imitation of the plaintiff Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ either by manufacturing or selling or offering for sale or in any manner advertising the same;

(b) granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff- Copy Right on the artistic work on the labels under the registered Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock by using the offending Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock or any other mark or marks which are similar or in any way deceptively similar to or a colourable imitation of the plaintiff Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ either by manufacturing or selling or offering for sale or in any manner advertising the same;

(c) granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from in any manner passing off their lungi products as that of the plaintiff by using the offending Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock as and those of the plaintiff under the registered Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock or by using any other Trademark which is similar or deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff trade mark ‘Lock Brand’;

(d) directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of the profits earned by them through the sale of lungi products bearing the offending trade mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock and directing payment of such profits to the plaintiff by way of damages for passing off committed by the defendants;

(e) directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff the entire stock of unused offending goods with Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock together with cartons, lables, brochures, printing blocks, containers, boxes, etc., bearing the offending Trademark for destruction; and

(f) directing the defendants to pay the plaintiff the costs of the suit.)

1. Suit filed under Sections 105 & 106 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and Sections 55 and 62 of the Copy Right Act 1957 read with the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking a Judgment and Decree restraining the defendants from infringing the registered Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ with the device of lock by any other similar mark under the name ‘Lock Brand’ and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the Copy Right of the plaintiff on the artistic work on the label of the registered Trade Mark ‘Lock Brand’ and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from passing off their Lungi products as that of the plaintiff and for accounts and consequential reliefs and for costs.

2. The plaintiff, M/s. K.A.S., Zainulabdin and Company is a partnership firm. The first defendant M/s. Murthy Lungi Company, is also a partnership firm. The second and third defendants are the partners of the first defendant.

3. In the plaint, it had been stated that the plaintiff is a leading and established manufacturer and marketer in Lungis and other textiles. They market their Lungi products under the brand ‘Lock Brand’. It is a label containing the device of a lock and the word ‘Lock Brand’. The plaintiff claimed that they have adopted this mark from the year 1950. They had also applied for registra