Back
DHARMESH SHARMA
Hamdard Laboratories India (Medicine Division) – Appellant
Versus
Unani Drugs Manufacturer Association (UDMA) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dharmesh Sharma, J.—This common judgment shall decide the two above-captioned First Appeals preferred under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, [‘CPC’] by the appellant/plaintiff, assailing the common impugned order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [‘trial Court’] in CS No. 449/2022 titled “Hamdard Laboratories India (Medicine Division) versus Unani Drugs Manufacturer Association (UDMA)”, whereby the applications filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1&2 of CPC and Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC respectively were dismissed by the learned trial Court.
Factual Matrix:
2. Briefly stated, the appellant herein has descended from HAMDARD Group established in the year 1906, and is using the trademark HAMDARD in relation to its wide range of products inter alia Unani and Ayurvedic medicines, under an exclusive license from its sister concern, Hamdard National Foundation, through a Deed of Agreement dated 11.08.1975.
3. It is a matter of record that various disputes arose among the successors of Hakeem Hafiz Abdul Majeed, the founder of the HAMDARD Group, which were amic
Injunction – Question of reputational damage shall be required to be considered by Commercial Court,
Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, when rectification proceedings are pending, the suit has to be stayed, pending final disposal of such proceedings.
Proper pleadings are essential for the impleadment of parties in trademark infringement cases, and mere commonality of directors does not suffice.
Point of law: Infringement of the registered trademark - plaintiff being the dominus litis, is entitled to implead the parties considered necessary for enforcing his claim.
The LPA remedy is not ousted by Section 13 of the 2015 Act.
E-commerce platforms must disclose complete seller details to prevent consumer deception and protect trademark rights, ensuring compliance with applicable legal standards for product authenticity.
The burden of proof on an ex-employee defendant in a trade mark infringement case and the relevance of uncontroverted evidence, such as the Court Commissioner's report, in establishing deceptive simi....
Infringement of trade mark and passing off - Permanent injunction - Appellants/defendants are bound down to their statement, till disposal of suit before Commercial Court. Readiness with which appell....
The court upheld the plaintiff's rights as the prior user and registered owner of the trademark, granting an injunction against the defendant's use of a similar mark due to the likelihood of consumer....
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
