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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 103148

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mrs Justice V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
MRF Limited – Appellant
Versus
M.S. Trading Co. – Respondent
CS/458/1996



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

THURSDAY, THE 07th DAY OF APRIL 2022

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

C.S.No.458 of 1996

MRF Limited

124, Greams Road,

Madras - 600 006.

... Plaintiff

Vs.

1. M.S.Trading Co.

Babari Mandi,

Aligarh - 202 001.

2. Mohamed Suleiman

Proprietor,

M.S.Trading Co.

Babari Mandi,

Aligarh - 202 001.

3. Gupta Lock & Hardware Agency,

113 A, Manohardas Katra,

Calcutta - 7

... Defendants

Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass

judgement and decree:-

a) granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, by

themselves or through their servants, agents, representatives or any one

claiming through them from reproducing, publishing, printing or causing to

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2

publish or using in any manner or in any material form on any goods, the

impugned artistic work as shown in Document No.2 or any other artistic

work which contains a reproduction of the whole or any portion of the

plaintiff's MRF Connected Letter Device artistic work as displayed in

Document No.1 and / or in any manner infringing the Copyright of the

plaintiff in the artistic work as shown in Document No.1.

b) granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and

their servants, agents, representatives or any one claiming through them

from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale or advertising for sale their

Iron Aldrop Door Bolts and other goods, using in connection with the goods

of the plaintiff's trademark MRF and / or the trade mark device shown in

Document No.2 or any other trade mark, which is identical with or

deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade marks 'MRF' or the MRF

Connected Letter Device trade mark (shown in Document No.1) and passing

off or enabling others to pass off the defendant's goods as and for those of

the plaintiff's.

c) for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to surrender to

the plaintiff, all representations in any material form and all their Door Bolts

and other goods, packaging materials, cartons, sales promotion material,

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3

advertising material and hoardings, letter heads, visiting cards, office

stationery and all other materials containing / bearing the trade mark MRF

and / or the trade mark / artistic work as shown in Document No.2 to the

plaintiff for destruction.

d) for a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff, directing the

defendants to render an account of profits made by them by the use of the

trade mark MRF and the trade mark / artistic work shown in Document No.2

on Door Bolts or on any of their goods or in any other manner and a final

decree in favour of the plaintiff for the amount of the profit found to have

been made by the defendants after the defendants have rendered accounts.

e) directing the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the costs of the suit.

This Civil Suit coming on this day before this court for hearing in the

presence of Mr.C.Daniel, advocate for the Plaintiff herein and upon reading

the plaint filed herein and the suit in C.S.No.458 of 1996 having been

dismissed for non prosecution against the 3rd defendant vide order dated

15.10.1997, and the learned counsel for the plaintiff having submitted that

the defendants have stopped using the plaintiff's trademark, and at present,

they are not carrying on any business by using the plaintiff's trademark,

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4

It is ordered as follows:-

That the suit in C.S.No.458 of 1996 be and is hereby disposed of

with liberty to the plaintiff to file a fresh suit against the defendants in the

event the defendants continue to infringe the plaintiff's trademark.

2. That there shall be no costs of this suit.

WITNESS

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