Calcutta High Court
Panghat Sarees Pvt. Ltd vs Panghat & Ors on 26 September, 2014
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen
GA No.3120 of 2014
CS No.358 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
PANGHAT SAREES PVT. LTD.
-Versus-
PANGHAT & ORS.
Appearance:
Mr. Ranjan Bachawat, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Debnath Ghosh, Adv.
...for the plaintiff.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
Date : 26th September, 2014.
The Court : Let the affidavit of service filed in Court
today be kept with the records.
In spite of service of this application, none has
appeared to oppose this application. The petitioner is claiming to
be the sole proprietor of 'Panghat'. It is stated that the
petitioner is the owner of the trademark Panghat Sarees and has
been continuing the same since 1999. It was initially in the name
of Nirmal Saraf and thereafter the private limited company was
formed in 2003. It is stated that the petitioner is the assignee
of the trademark Panghat from Nirmal Saraf, who is the promoter-
director of the company. On 30th January, 2014, on an application
filed by the petitioner, the trademark 'Panghat Sarees' have been
2
registered in the name of the petitioner in Class-24 under the
Trademarks Act, 1999. The petitioner has also filed an application
on 19th August, 2014 for registration of the wordmark "Panghat
Sarees" in Class-24 under the Trademarks Act, 1999 to protect its
exclusive proprietary right over the wordmark. In July, 2014, the
petitioner came to know that the respondents are trying to sell
sarees under an identical and deceptively similar mark "Panghat" from 127A, Park Street, Kolkata-700 017. Immediately, a cease and desist notice was issued on 20th August, 2014. Following such notice an e-mail was forwarded to the Advocate of the petitioner stating that the partnership firm was established on 1st April, 2010. A deed of partnership, executed by the partners, dated 1st April, 2010 was also forwarded to the Advocate-on-record of the petitioner. Although the wordmark has not been registered, but the fact remains that the labelmark namely, "Panghat Sarees" have been registered on 30th January, 2004 and the said registration is still valid and subsisting. It also appears that the volume of sale of the sarees of the petitioner has increased considerably from 2004-05. In such a situation, an obligation is cast upon the defendant to explain to the adoption of the wordmark "Panghat". In spite of notice the defendants are not represented. This Court is, prima facie, of the view that the petitioner has a strong prima facie case and the balance of convenience lies in favour of passing an ad interim order in favour of the petitioner. 3 Accordingly, there shall be an order in terms of prayer (b) of the petition.
The matter is made returnable on 3rd November, 2014. The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the respondents.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) A/s.