IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
R.C. Lahoti, S.N. Kapoor, JJ.
Rob Mathys India Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Synthes Ag Chur - Respondent
FAO(OS) 192 & 193 of 1996
Decided On : 29-05-1997
JUDGMENT
S.N. Kapoor, J.--These two FAOs arise out of a collaboration agreement between predecessor-in-interest respondent No.2 and promoters of the appellant Company for formation of appellant- company in India and revocation of the agreement and withdrawal of implied consent to use Trade Marks by successors of a Swiss partnership firm which entered into the collaboration agreement plaintiff/respondent No.2 and proprietors of unregistered Trade Mark "AO/ASIF" and registered device and the word "Synthes" Trade Marks.
The plaintiff/respondents have filed two suits -- one for "passing off action" and the other for "infringement action".
In I.A. 3420/93 in Suit No. 709/93 for passing off action, learned Single Judge passed an injunction order restraining the appellants from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale and advertising surgical instruments and orthopedic implants one under the unregistered trade mark A.O./ASIF or device mark or any other similar mark as is likely to cause confusion, deception or may amount to passing off the goods of the defendants for those of the plaintiffs.
On I.A. No. 3419/93 in Suit No. 708/93 for infringement action, learned Single Judge passed similar order restraining the appellants from using the registered trade mark "Synthes" or any other similar mark amounting to infringement of the trade mark causing confusion or deception or amounting to passing off.
F.A.O. No. 192/96 has been filed against the injunction order on I.A. No. 3419/93 in Suit No. 709/93 in infringement action, while F.A.O. No. 193/96 relates to I.A. No. 3420/93 in Suit No. 708/93, in passing off action.
UNDISPUTED/UNCHALLENGED FACTS COMMON TO BOTH THE MATTERS.
2.1 In so far as factual matrix is concerned, one Robert Mathys, a Swiss mechanical engineer, is said to be the force in development of surgical instruments and orthopedic implants, etc. made of special steel and formation of the Association of Study of Internal Fixation (AO/ASIF) as well as Synthes A.G. Chur plaintiff/respondent No.1. Robert Mathys along with his son Renauld Mathys founded a partnership firm M/s. Robert Mathys Company in Bettlach Switzerland (the predecessor in interest of responded No.2) in 1946. In 1958 they entered the field of the development and manufacture of machinery and apparatus including surgical instruments and orthopedic implants and similar other components made of special steels. On 15th April, 1978, the firm entered into a collaboration agreement with N.P. Dhawan and R.M. Dhawan, proprietors of the appellant Company. On 20.4.90 M/s. Robert Mathys Company was converted into a corporate body and Mathys Limited Bettlach R.2 came to be incorporated.
2.2. In 1958 the Association of Study of Internal Fixation (ASIF) was founded with the object of studying internal fixation and its bio-mechanical pre-requisites and pitfalls relating to regaining of the complete function of injured limbs by anatomic reduction, stable fixation and early mobilization. These two letters `AO' of the trade mark (unregistered) are the acronyms formed from initial letters of two German words "Arbits genunis schatt" and "osteosynthes" while the word "ASIF" is acronym formed from the English words "Association for study of Internal Fixation" and AO/ASIF is also the name of the Swiss trust which owns almost all the shares in "synthes AG CHUR" plaintiff/respondent No.1. In 1960 the founders of AO and ASIF established AG Chur respondent No. 1 for the manufacturing marketing of a complete surgical armamentarium with the hope that respondent No.1 would eventually provide fund for research etc.
During 1960 to 1963 A.G. Chur R. 1 granted the right of manufacture and sale of surgical instruments and implants exclusively to three firms including M/s.Robert Mathys Company along with two other firms. But in 1963 Respondent No.1 Synthes AG Chur granted exclusive licence in favour of M/s Rob
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.