Rajasekaran G. S. and Others v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police Virudhunagar and Another

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 79832

MADRAS HIGH COURT
A, J
Rajasekaran G. S. and Others v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police Virudhunagar and Another

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Advocate A
For the Respondents:Advocate B

Table of Content
1. dispute regarding trademark usage between family businesses. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments on legal validity of agreements affecting trademarks. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court observations on the use of inherent jurisdiction. (Para 5 , 6)
4. final ruling on the fate of the original petitions. (Para 7 , 8)

1. Both these criminal original petitions have been filed for quashing the FIR in Cr.No.483 of 2014 registered on the file of the Inspector of Police, Sivakasi East Police Station, Virudhunagar District for the offences under S.103, S.104 of trademarks Act, 1999 and S.468, S.471 and S.420 of IPC. The de facto complainant is the second respondent herein. He is none other than the brother of the first petitioner herein. The case of the de facto complainant is that their family was carrying on business of manufacturing matches in the name and style of R.K. Match Company Private Limited and M/s.Thendral Match Works Industry. They were originally carrying on business as a partnership firm in the name of M/s. Soundarapandian Match Works which was later taken over by R.K. Match Company Private Limited. They were carrying on their business by using the trademark "Bulb". Bulb with violet

Click Here to Read the rest of this document