Delhi District Court
M/S Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd vs Santosh Kumar on 18 May, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MR. SATYABRATA PANDA, ADJ-04,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS (COMM) NO.422 OF 2019
Date of institution: 04.07.2017
Arguments heard: 25.03.2023
Date of judgment: 18.05.2023
M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd.
51/40, Goldiee House
Nayaganj, Kanpur, UP
........plaintiff
VS
1. Santosh Kumar
proprietor of New Goldiee
Gali no.1, Plot no.9
Baba Kewal Ram Marg
near 17 no.Chungi, Dauba Colony
NIT Faridabad-121001
2. Rohit Food Products
Unit: Plot no.9, Octoris No.17
NIT Faridabad-121001
........Defendants
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendants for permanent injunction, damages and other reliefs alleging infringement of the plaintiff's trademark.
2. The case of the plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint is as follows. It is stated in the plaint that the plaintiff company is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of wide range of food products for human consumption including spices and other allied CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.1 and related goods (hereinafter referred to as the said goods and/or business). The plaintiff is proprietor of Trade Mark GOLDIEE and GOLDIEE formative trademark/labels in relation to the aforesaid goods (hereinafter referred to as the said trademark/labels). It is stated that the word GOLDIEE written in English and/or Hindi and/or other vernacular language forms essential part of said trademark/labels of the plaintiff. The word GOLDIEE is also forming material part of the Plaintiff's Trade Name and the same is house mark of the Plaintiff. One of the representations of the plaintiff's said trademark/label is as under:
3. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff through its predecessors adopted the said trademark/label in the year 1980 and has been continuously and uninterruptedly using the same in relation to its goods in the course of trade since then. M/s Shubham Industries is the predecessor of the plaintiff and the plaintiff on 01.04.1998 took over the said firm with all its assets and liabilities. The plaintiff, in order to acquire statutory rights in the said trademark/label GOLDIEE and GOLDIEE formative marks, filed various applications for registration thereof under the Trade Mark Act, 1999 for the goods mentioned therein. The said trademark/label GOLDIEE of the Plaintiff duly got registered as per the following particulars:
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.2 S. No. Trade Mark Application Class Date of Status No. Application
1. 773763 3 14/02/1997 Regd.
GOLDIEE
2. GOLDIEE (Word 1687004 29 14/05/2008 Regd.
Mark)
3. 703444 29 27/03/1996 Regd.
GOLDIEE
4. 703443 30 27/03/1996 Regd.
GOLDIEE
5. 703442 30 27/03/1996 Regd.
GOLDIEE
6. GOLDIEE (Word 696960 30 02/02/1996 Regd.
Mark)
7. 367000 30 01/10/1980 Regd.
GOLDIEE LABEL
8. 773762 30 14/02/1997 Regd.
GOLDIEE LABEL CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.3 It is stated in the plaint that the abovementioned registrations of the Plaintiff are valid, legal, subsisting and in force.
4. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff is the proprietor of the said trademark/labels GOLDIEE in relation to the said goods and business on account of honest and bona fide adoption and prior use. The said goods and business being carried on by the plaintiff under the said trademark/label is very extensive and the goods and business thereunder have been practically distributed in major parts of the country. The said trademark/labels have acquired distinctiveness in the market and trade and are identified with plaintiff and the said goods and business of plaintiff, as exclusively originating from the plaintiffs' source alone. The said goods and business of the plaintiff bearing the said trademark/label are highly demanded in the market on account of their standard quality and precision, the said trademark/labels of the plaintiff have become distinctive indicium of the plaintiff in relation to their said goods. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff's goods and business under the said trademark/labels have acquired tremendous goodwill and enviable reputation in the markets and the plaintiff has already built up a handsome and valuable trade thereunder. The year wise sales of the Plaintiff under the said trademark/label as stated in the plaint are as under:
Year Turnover in Rs.
1987-1988 12,566,929/-
1988-1989 19,497,953/-
1989-1990 20,219,386/-
1990-1991 33,900,230/-
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.4 1991-1992 57,679,268/-
1992-1993 78,394,530/-
1993-1994 80,941,660/-
1994-1995 96,591,304/-
1995-1996 127,619,550/-
1996-1997 185,908,499/-
1997-1998 229,307,805/-
1998-1999 315,619,896/-
1999-2000 361,541,482/-
2000-2001 434,407,906/-
2001-2002 501,707,005/-
2002-2003 633,808,964/-
2003-2004 736,690,017/-
2004-2005 765,424,470/-
2005-2006 1,108,807,668/-
2007-2008 1,347,917,420/-
2008-2009 1,825,379,861/-
2009-2010 2,296,692,374/-
2010-2011 2,806,684,012/-
2011-2012 2,746,753,392/-
2012-2013 2,970,544,597/-
5. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff has been continuously promoting their said goods and business under their said trademark/labels through print, audio/visual media, advertisements and publicity in leading newspapers, distribution of trade literature, trade hoardings and boards etc. The plaintiff has already spent enormous amounts of moneys and efforts thereon. In consequence thereof and having regard to the aforesaid including the excellent quality and the high standards of the plaintiff's manufacture and trade, the said trademark/label of the plaintiff enjoy solid, enduring and first-class reputation and goodwill in the markets. As a result thereof such vast goodwill and reputation earned by the plaintiff under the said trademark/label, the said trademark/labels has acquired secondary meaning which denotes the Plaintiff and their said goods. Activities of the Plaintiffs are also CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.5 apparent from their website www.goldiee.com and http://www.goldieeonlinestore.com/. It is further stated in the plaint that the art works involved in the plaintiff's said trademark/labels GOLDIEE and formative trademarks are original artistic works and the plaintiff is the owner and proprietor of the copyright therein within the meaning of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiff has been dealing with its art works/copyright in the course of trade in relation to its said goods and business inter-alia within the meaning of Section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Over the period of time and having regard to market trends and to the plaintiff's expanding new and innovative products minor changes have been taking place in the artwork of said trademark/labels. However essential and overall features have essentially and broadly remained the same. It is further stated in the plaint that Plaintiff's said goods and business are known, recognized, demanded, sold and traded with reference to its said trademark/label GOLDIEE. The members of the trade, industry, consumers and general public at large are well aware of the Plaintiff's said goods and business thereunder. The Plaintiff's said trademark/label GOLDIEE is well known trademark within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (zg) of the Trade Mark Act. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff's said trademark/label has become distinctive associated and acquired secondary significance with the Plaintiff and Plaintiff's said goods and business. The purchasing public, the trade, market and industry at large identify and distinguish the plaintiff's said goods under the said trademark/label with the plaintiff and from the plaintiff's source and CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.6 origin alone and regard them as high quality products exclusively as that of the plaintiff.
6. It is further stated in the plaint that the Plaintiff is a market leader and besides maintaining excellent quality of its said goods and business under the said trademark/label lays tremendous emphasis on innovation. Plaintiff through consistent research and development efforts, on which tremendous amounts of money and efforts are being continuously spent, the Plaintiff has consistently been improving the quality of its said goods and business with the view to enhance its customer base and increase its market share. Plaintiff's said goods under the said trademark/labels are available to the consumers all over the country through network of around 1200 distributors and C & F agents. Plaintiff has achieved ISO 9001:2000 certification in the year 2005, further in the year 2007, achieved HACCP certification. Also following Food Products Order (FPO) guidelines, an in-house laboratory is established, under the supervision of quality control chemist and food technologists for quality consciousness. Recently the company has taken CODEX HACCP & ISO 9001:2008 certifications. Every single batch at GOLDIEE's processing unit undergoes a specified and Agmark certified process before entering the premises: a tertiary level of testing on the product follows till the end process of packaging. The incorporation of modern techniques and use of the world class Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system from Microsoft Dynamics has helped the company to constantly inculcate best practices Plaintiff has done sampling of its products to all the CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.7 participants in Delhi Marathon Event 2010 and Mumbai Marathon Event for 2011. It is further stated in the plaint that the Plaintiff's said goods and services under the said trademark/label are known for their superior quality and reliability and are extremely popular and are in great demand which is ever increasing. The purchasers and users of the plaintiff's said goods under the said trademark/label include all sections of society including industry & house-hold sector. The Plaintiff on account excellent business of their goods under the said trademark/labels have achieved many awards. Excellency Award by the then Defence Minister Shri Pranav Mukerjee. Spice Men, Udyog Patra by the Indian Government Minister Shri Ramkrishna Hegre, Shan-e-Kanpur Avadh etc. It is further stated in the plaint that the said trademark/label is one of the most valuable assets of the Plaintiff. Plaintiff is the proprietor thereof as also of its goodwill and reputation under the statutory and common law and in view thereof the Plaintiff has interalia the exclusive rights to the use of the said trademark and nobody can be permitted to use the same or any deceptively similar trademark/labels/copyrights thereto in any manner whatsoever without the leave and license of the Plaintiff. It is further stated in the plaint that the Plaintiff has been extremely vigilant in protecting its right in its said trademark/labels. The Plaintiff has been taking various civil as well as criminal actions against unscrupulous traders/ infringers/ pirates/ counterfeiters and the Hon'ble Court has been protecting the intellectual property rights of the plaintiff by passing immediate appropriate orders.
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.8
7. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendant no.1 is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of spices. The defendant No.1 is carrying on his business as Proprietor of "New Goldiee" at the address mentioned in the memo of parties. The defendant no.2 is the manufacturing unit of defendant no.1 under the name and style of "Rohit Food Products". It is stated that to the best of the plaintiff's knowledge, the defendant no.1 was also the proprietor of the defendant no.2, however, that the plaintiff was not aware of the exact relation, nexus and constitution of the defendant no.1 and defendant no.2, and that the defendants be called upon to explain their relationship, nexus and constitution. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendants have adopted and started using the trademark GOLDIEE as word mark and in artistic label/device form in relation to their impugned goods and business. It is further stated that the impugned trademark/label adopted and being used by the defendants in relation to their impugned goods and business are identical with and deceptively similar to the plaintiff's said trademark/label in each and every respect including phonetically, visually, structurally, in its basic idea, color combination and in its essential features. The defendants are using all kinds of false description on its impugned goods to wrongly link the impugned goods with the plaintiff and to wrongly, convey to the public and customers that the impugned goods are coming from the source and origin of the plaintiff. The impugned goods and business there under are also of the same/similar/allied/cognate to those of the plaintiff Representation of the impugned trademark/label is as under:
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.9
8. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendants are not the proprietor of the impugned trademark/label and have adopted and are so using the same in relation to their impugned goods and business and are otherwise dealing with it in the course of trade without the leave and license of the plaintiff. The defendants have no right to use it in any manner in relation to its impugned goods and business or for any other specification of goods and business whatsoever being in violation of the plaintiff's rights therein. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendants by their impugned adoption and user of the impugned trademark/label are violating plaintiff's aforesaid trademark/label and are thereby passing off and enabling others to pass off their goods and business as those of the plaintiff as well as diluting the plaintiff's proprietary rights therein. The defendants are further infringing the plaintiff's trademark which is inter alia duly registered under different numbers as detailed above. Defendants are also infringing the copyright in the artwork of the plaintiff's said trademark/label Defendants cannot be exonerated from the charges of falsification, unfair and unethical trade practices. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendants are fully aware of the plaintiff's rights, goodwill, reputations, benefits and users etc. in the plaintiff's said trademark/label at the time of their impugned adoption and use of the impugned trademark/label. The resemblance between the rival trademarks are so close that it can hardly occur CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.10 except by deliberate imitation. The defendants are called upon to explain as to how they hit upon the impugned trademark. The defendants impugned adoption and user thereof is tainted at inception and is a pirate use of the plaintiff's said trademark/label.
9. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendants have adopted and started using the impugned trademark/label dishonestly, fraudulently and out of positive greed with a view to take advantage and to trade upon the established goodwill, reputation and proprietary rights of the plaintiff in the plaintiff's said trademark/label. By the defendants impugned adoption and use, deception and confusion in the market is ensuing or is likely to so ensue. The plaintiff's said trademark is otherwise being diluted and eclipsed thereby. Any person not knowing clearly the relationship between the parties to this action is bound to be confused by the defendants impugned adoption and use and might well do business with the defendants thinking that he is dealing with the plaintiff or that some strong, vital and subtle links exist between the plaintiff and the defendants. It is further stated in the plaint that due to the defendants' impugned activities, the plaintiff is suffering huge losses both in business and in reputation and such losses are incapable of being assessed in monetary terms. Unwary purchasers and trade are being deceived as to the origin of goods or business. Defendants' gains are plaintiff's losses. The plaintiff has no access to the defendants' accounts and the defendants are liable to render their accounts to the plaintiff and to make good to the plaintiff the profits and business earned by them. It is further stated in the plaint that apart from the sales to the direct customers CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.11 from their Shop/Premises, the defendants are supplying the impugned goods bearing the impugned trademark/label to the dealers/retailers/distributors in the markets of New Delhi viz. Parliament Street, Barakhamba, Chanakyapur, Gole Market Bengali Market, Connaught Place, Vasant Kunj, Naraina, Mandir Marg etc. Defendants are indulging in clandestine and surreptitious sales since no formal invoice is being issued by the defendants and their dealers/retailers/distributors against the sale of their impugned goods bearing the impugned trademark. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff learnt about the defendants' impugned trademark/label GOLDIEE in last week of June, 2017 when plaintiff while making a random search on the web-site of the Trade Marks Registry i.e www.ipindia.nic.in came across the impugned trademark/label GOLDIEE filed by the defendant no.1 under no. 3524392 in class 30 in respect Spices. The said application has been filed by defendant no.1 on 11.04.2017 as proposed to be used and the same has been objected by Ld. Registrar of Trademark by sending Examination Report wherein plaintiff's registration has been cited. Immediately upon coming to know of the said application plaintiff made inquiry in the market and trade which revealed that the defendants have just started the use of the impugned trademark/label. The inquiry further revealed that the the Defendants are not only making retail sales but are also supplying the impugned goods bearing the impugned trademark/label to various dealers/shopkeepers/retailers in New Delhi market viz. Parliament Street, Barakhamba Chanakyapuri, Gole Market Bengali Market, Connaught Place, Vasant Kunj, CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.12 Naraina, Mandir Marg etc who are making sales thereof to unwary consumers without issuing formal invoices Plaintiff could also lay hands on the impugned goods of defendants under the impugned trademark in the markets of New Delhi.
10. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings in the plaint, the present suit has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"(a) For a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants by themselves as also through their individual proprietors/partners, agents, representatives, distributors, assigns, heirs, successors, stockists and all others acting for and on their behalf from using, manufacturing, selling, soliciting, exporting, displaying, advertising or by any other mode or manner dealing in or using the impugned trademark/label/device Goldiee and/or any other word/mark/label/device which may be identical with and/or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's said trademark/label Goldiee in relation to their impugned goods and business of spices and allied/related products and from doing any other acts of deeds amounting to or likely to:
(i) Infringement of plaintiff's aforesaid registered trademark/label GOLDIEE;
(ii) Passing off by use of plaintiff's said trademark/label and trade-name GOLDIEE;
(iii) Infringement of plaintiff's copyright in the art work of trademark/label GOLDIEE as depicted in para 3 of the plaint;
(b) Restraining the defendants from deposing off or dealing with their assets including their premises at the addresses mentioned in the memo of parties and stocks in trade or any other assets as may be brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Court during the course of the proceedings and on the defendant's disclosure thereof and which the defendants are called upon to disclose and/or on its ascertainments by the plaintiff as the plaintiff is not aware of the same as per section CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.13 135 (2)(c) of the Trade Marks Acts, 1999 as it could adversely affect the plaintiff's ability to recover the costs on pecuniary reliefs thereon.
(c) For an order for delivery up of all the impugned finished and unfinished materials bearing the impugned and violative trademarks/label/device GOLDIEE and/or any other word/mark/label which may be identical with and/or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's said trademark/label GOLDIEE including its blocks, labels, display, boards, sign board, trade literatures etc to the plaintiff for the purposes of destruction and eraser.
(d) For and order for rendition of accounts of profits earn by the defendants by their impugned illegal trade activities and a decree for the amount so found in favour of plaintiff on such rendition of accounts.
(e) For an order for costs of proceedings.
(f) For such other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."
11. Vide order dated 07/07/2017, ex parte ad interim injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiff and a local commissioner was appointed to seize the infringing articles. The local commissioner visited the site and seized the infringing goods and has filed his report on 23/08/2017.
12. The defendants were served with the summons in the suit and entered appearance through counsel. The defendants also filed written statement. It is stated in the written statement that the defendant no.1 was running proprietorship firm and had proposed to CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.14 manufacture and sell spices and to trade under the name and style of "New Goldiee". It is further stated that the defendant no.1 had obtained necessary approvals from the concerned authority to do his business in Haryana and more specifically in the nearby area of Faridabad. It is further stated that the defendant no.1 had neither manufactured nor sold/distributed the spices etc. under the name and style of "New Goldiee" and rather the defendant no.1 was waiting for registration of the trademark "New Goldiee" before starting the business under the name and style of "New Goldiee" and that there were no packed/sealed packets/pouches of spices etc. bearing the name and style "New Goldiee" in the market of Haryana or Delhi nor in the premises of the defendant no.1. It is further stated that the defendant no.2 was a separate proprietorship firm having no connection with the proposed business of spices etc. under the name and style of "New Goldiee". It was further stated that the trademarke "New Goldiee" was an invented and novel word and there was no infringement with the plaintiff's trademark. The written statement has been signed by Mr. Santosh Kumar as defendant no.1 and also mentions "along with the defendant no.2". However, subsequently, the defendants stopped appearing in the suit and were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 20/09/2018.
13. Thereafter, the matter was put up for ex parte arguments in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court dated 07/02/2019 in CS (Comm.) No. 335/2018 in M/s. Shree /Rajmoti Industries v. M/s. Rajmoti Foods products.
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.15
14. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has contended that the defendants have been proceeded ex parte, that the trademark of the plaintiff is registered and the registration is in the public domain, that as per the local commissioner's report dated 23/08/2017 the local commissioner has seized the infringing goods, that the defendant no.1 has admitted to applying for registration of the impugned mark, and that the defendants have stopped appearing in the suit, and, hence, there is no requirement for any oral testimony and that the plaintiff would be entitled to decree in terms of the prayer clause of the plaint. The learned counsel has relied upon the judgment in Rajmoti (supra).
15. The ld. counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that the plaintiff would be entitled to decree as the trademark used by the defendants was clearly infringing of the trademark of the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has also submitted that the plaintiff would be entitled to damages and has relied upon the judgements of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Louis Vuitton Malletier Vs. Iqbal Singh and ors., 2019 SCC online DEL 7879: (2019) 258 DLT 760 and in Whatman International Ltd Vs. P. Mehta and Ors, 2019 SCC online Del 6856: (2019) 257 DLT 472. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has also relied upon Microsoft Corporation Vs.Rajendra Pawar and Anr. reported as2008 (36) PTC 697 (Del.) and has prayed that punitive damages be imposed upon the defendants as they have deliberately evaded the Court proceedings.
16. I have heard the ex parte arguments of the ld. counsel for the CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.16 plaintiff and I have perused the record.
17. The ex parte ad interim injunction was passed in the suit vide order dated 07/07/2017 and local commissioner was also appointed to search and seize the infringing goods from the premises of the defendants. The local commissioner has filed his report on 23/08/2017. As per his report, the local commissioner had on 12/07/2017 at 12.30 PM visited the premises of the defendant no.1 at Gali No.1, Plot No.9, Baba Kewal Ram Marg near 17 No. Chungi, Dabua Colony, NIT Faridabad 121001. The premises was found locked and the locks were broken in the presence of the police. The local commissioner has reported that infringing material was found in the search and was seized. The local commissioner has filed the inventory list as well as photographs. The inventory list contains items such as packets of Chilli powder, Haldi and Dhania under the "New Goldie" trademark as well labels of "New Goldie". The photographs show the board of "Rohit Food Products" i.e. the defendant no.2 at the site. The seized materials were given on superdari to Mr. Rohit Kaushik, who was the nephew of the defendant no.1.
18. Upon comparison of trademark of the plaintiff "Goldiee" with the impugned trademark used by the defendants on the seized goods being "New Goldiee", it is clear that the impugned trademark of the defendant infringes the registered trademark of the plaintiff being deceptively similar. The local commissioner has as per his report filed on 23/08/2017 seized the impugned goods containing the CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.17 infringing trademark "New Goldiee" on packets of spices. The defendants have admitted in the written statement that they had applied for registration of the impugned trademark on proposed to be used basis. The seizure of the goods shows that the defendants were using the impugned trademark on the packaging. The defendants have deliberately stayed away from the proceedings even after having appeared initially. An adverse inference would be drawn against the defendants for their avoiding conduct. I would hold that the plaintiff is entitled to grant of relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the plaintiff's trademark. The plaintiff would also be entitled to relief of delivery up of the infringing articles found at the premises of the defendants for destruction. The defendants have deliberately stayed away from the present proceedings. It also appears that no accounts were produced before the local commissioner. I am in agreement with the submissions of the ld. counsel for the plaintiff that in the present case, the defendant ought to be made liable for punitive damages. The defendants have elected to stay away from the proceedings and cannot be permitted to enjoy the benefit of staying away. As held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Microsoft Corporation (supra), awarding punitive damages prevents the erring party from taking advantage of its own wrong by escaping prosecution or detection. I would hold the defendants liable for punitive damages of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the plaintiff.
19. Accordingly, the following decree is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants:
CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.18 a. decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the trademark "Goldiee" or any other mark which is identical or deceptively similar to the "Goldiee" mark which would amount to infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademark "Goldiee";
b. Delivery up of the infringing articles found at the premises of the defendant no.1 for destruction; and c. Decree of damages of Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the decree till actual realization;
d. Costs are awarded in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The pleader's fee is computed as Rs. 35,000/-. The costs shall also include the expenses incurred towards fees of the local commissioners in the suit.
Let the Decree sheet be drawn up accordingly. File be consigned to record room Announced in the open court.
(SATYABRATA PANDA) Additional District Judge-04 Judge Code- DL01057 PHC/New Delhi/18.05.2023 CS (COMM) NO.422/2019 M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd. vs. Santosh Kumar& ors. page no.19