Key Points: - The plaintiff is registered proprietor of trademarks D.R.Raanka, D.R., D.R.R. and associated device marks; defendant used "D.R.R" in trade name "Shri Mahalakshmi D.R.R Velli Maligai" leading to dispute over infringement vs passing off. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - Court framed issues on infringement of registered trademarks and passing off, and whether plaintiff is entitled to rendition of accounts, surrender of stocks bearing offending marks, and costs. (!) (!) (!) (!) - Anti-dissection rule discussed: marks must be considered as wholes; composite marks/read in conjunction with device marks; reliance on Kaviraj Pandit Durga Dutt Sharma and S.M. Dyechem principles. (!) (!) (!) (!) - Findings: Issue 1 & 2 (infringement) are answered against the plaintiff; the use of DRR by defendant in the trade name cannot be said to infringe plaintiff's registered word marks DR and DR Raanka Bros; DRR used as part of a larger trade name with Indian goddess name and Tamil wording not proven as infringement. (!) (!) (!) (!) - Court held there is no scope for confusion; distinct trading styles; passing off claim also not established; thus Issues 3-6 decided against plaintiff; suit dismissed with costs. (!) (!) (!) (!)

How to determine infringement of plaintiff's registered trademarks D.R.RAANKA and D.R.?

What is the court's stance on passing off versus infringement in relation to the defendant's use of the mark "D.R.R."?

What is the court's conclusion regarding the entitlement to reliefs, including injunctions and accounts, in this case?

C.S(COMM.DIV.)No.444 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on

10.01.2023

Pronounced on

24.05.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

C.S(COMM.DIV.)No.444 of 2019

M/s.D.R.Raanka Bros.,

Door No.151, 1^st Floor, N.S.C.Bose Road,

Chennai – 600 079.

Represented by its Partner,

Mr.Kapil Ranka.

... Plaintiff

vs.

Mr.Om Prakash,

trading as Sri Mahalakshmi DRR Velli Maligai,

329, Kamaraj Street,

Villupuram – 605 602. .. Defendant

PRAYER : Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 O.S.Rules read with

Order VII Rule 1 of CPC and Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act,

2015 along with Sections 27, 28, 29, 134 & 135 of the Trade Marks Act,

1999 praying to pass :

a) Granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant

by itself, its servant, agents or any one claiming through it from in any

_____________

Page No.1 of 51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM.DIV.)No.444 of 2019

manner infringing the Plaintiff's registered Trade Marks D.R.RAANKA

and D.R., by using the identical and offending mark D.R.R. or any other

mark or marks which are in anyway identical, deceptively similar to or a

colorable imitation of the Plaintiff's said registered Trade Marks, either

by manufacturing or selling or offering for sale or advertising or in any

manner using the same as or as part of its trademark / trade name /

trading style / business name or in any other manner whatsoever;

b) Granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant

by itself, its servant, agents or any one claiming through it from in any

manner passing off its products or business or services under the

offending mark D.R.R. as and for the plaintiff's products / business /

services under the Marks D.R.RAANKA / D.R./ D.R.R. by use of the

said offending mark as or as part of its trademark / trade name / trading

style / business name and / or in any other manner whatsoever;

c) Directing the defendant to render a true and faithful account

of the profits earned by them by use of the offending mark D.R.R. as or

as part of its trademark / trade name / trading style / business name and

direct payment of such profits to the plaintiff for the acts of infringement

and passing off committed by the defendant.

d) Directing the defendant to surrender to the plaintiff the

entire stock of offending labels, name boards, hoardings, placards,

_____________

Page No.2 of 51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM.DIV.)No.444 of 2019

pamphlets, stickers, stationery or any other materials bearing the

offending mark D.R.R. along with the blocks and dyes, for destruction.

e) Directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the cost of the

suit.

For Plaintiff : Mr.Rajesh Ramanathan

For Defendant : Mr.A.K.Rajaraman

JUDGMENT

This Suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant

for the following relief:-

i. For grant of a permanent injunction

restraining the defendant by itself, its servant,

agents or any one claiming through it from in

any manner infringing the plaintiff’s

registered Trade Marks “D.R.RAANKA” and

“D.R.” by using the identical and offending

Mark “D.R.R.” or any other Mark or Marks

which are in anyway identical, deceptively

similar to or a colorable imitation of the

plaintiff’s said registered Trade Marks, either

by manufacturing or selling or offering for

sale or advertising or in any manner using the

same as or as part of its trademark / trade

name / trading style / business name or in any

other manner whatsoever;

_____________

Page No.3 of 51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S(COMM.DIV.)No.444 of 2019

ii. For grant of a permanent injunction

restraining the defendant by itself, its servant,

agents or any one claiming through it from in

any manner passing off its