IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
G. Rajasuria, J.
Wipro Cyprus Private Limited - Appellants
Vs.
Zeetel Electronics - Respondent
O.A. Nos. 172 and 173 of 2010 in C.S. No. 156 of 2010
Decided On : 09-04-2010
Trade Mark Infringement - Interim Injunction - Trade Marks Act - Section 28, 29, 30
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff sought an interim injunction to restrain the defendant from using the trade mark 'YARDLEY' or any similar expression in relation to their products, alleging trade mark infringement and passing off. The defendant argued that the goods were imported from the original manufacturer and therefore not infringing the plaintiff's rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the plaintiff, as the assignee of the trade mark, had the exclusive right to use it in India. The defendant's importation of goods bearing the plaintiff's trade mark violated the plaintiff's exclusive rights under the Trade Marks Act. The court allowed one application for interim injunction and dismissed the other.
Issues: The main issues were whether the defendant's importation of goods bearing the plaintiff's trade mark constituted trade mark infringement and passing off, and whether the plaintiff had the exclusive right to use the trade mark in India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Sections 28, 29, and 30 of the Trade Marks Act to establish the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the trade mark in India and to prohibit the defendant from importing the goods. The court also considered the contractual relationship between the assignor and the plaintiff in determining the rights of the parties.
Final Decision: The court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing, selling, and advertising products using the trade mark 'YARDLEY' and dismissed the application for a similar injunction related to passing off.
JUDGMENT :
G. Rajasuria, J.
1. Original Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant an order of interim injunction, restraining the Respondent, by itself, its principal, servants, agents, distributors, or anyone claiming through him from manufacturing, selling, advertising and offering for sale using the trade mark YARDLEY or any other similar sounding expression or in any media and use the same in invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or by using any other trade .mark which is in any way phonetically similar to the Applicant trade mark YARDLEY or in relation to any product including Talcum powder, body spray or any other cosmetics and toiletry products and use the same or use the mark in invoices, letters heads and visiting cards or any other trade literature or by using any other trade mark which is in any way phonetically similar to the Applicant registered Trade mark Nos. 84018 & 372280 in Class 3 or in any manner infringe the Applicant's registered Trade Mark pending disposal of the above suit.
Original Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant an order of interim injunction to restrain the Respondent, jointly and severally, by themselves, their Directors, servants, agents, representatives and all those acting in concert with them or claiming under or through them or otherwise however, from using the impugned name 'YARDLE' upon or in relation to any of their product including talcum powder, body spray and other cosmetic and toiletry preparations and/or any other name/marks which may be identical to and/or deceptively similar to the Applicant corporate name, trade mark 'YARDLEY' and from in any manner, passing off or attempting to pass off or causing, enabling or assisting others to pass off their talcum powder, body spray and other cosmetic preparations as and for the business and products of the Applicant, pending disposal of the above suit.
These Original Application coming on this day before this Court for hearing the court made the following order:
Compendiously and concisely, the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of these applications would run thus;
(a) The plaintiff filed the suit seeking the following relief's:
"(a) to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant by itself, its principal, servants, agents, distributors or anyone claiming through him from manufacturing, selling advertising and offering for sale using the trade mark YARDLEY or any other similar sounding expression or in any media and use the same in invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or by using any other trade mark which is in any way phonetically similar to the plaintiffs' trade mark YARDLEY or in relation to any product including Talcum powder, body spray or any other cosmetics and toiletry products and use the same or use the mark in invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or any other trade literature or by using any other trade mark which is in any way phonetically similar to the plaintiffs' registered Trade Mark Nos. 84012 and 372280 in Class 3 or in any manner infringe the plaintiff's registered Trade Mark.
- to grant an order of permanent injunction to restrain the defendants, jointly and severally, by themselves, their Directors, servants, agents, representatives and all those acting in concert with them or claiming under or through them or otherwise howsoever, from using the impugned name 'YARDLEY' upon or in relation to any of their product including talcum powder, body spray and other cosmetic and toiletry preparations and/or any other name/marks which may be identical to and/or deceptively similar to the plaintiff corporate name, trade mark 'YARDLEY' and from in any manner, passing off or attempting to pass off or causing, enabling or assisting others to pass off their talcum powder, body spray and other cosmetic preparations as and for the business and products of the plaintiff.
- to direct the defendant to surrender to the plaint
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.