Delhi High Court - Orders
Relaxo Footwears Limited vs Laklite Footwear Private Limited & Anr on 26 May, 2023
Author: Amit Bansal
Bench: Amit Bansal
$~17
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 356/2023
RELAXO FOOTWEARS LIMITED ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr.Pravin Anand, Mr. Saif Khan,
Mr.Shobhit Agarwal, Ms.Swati Jain
and Mr.Prajjwal Kushwaha,
Advocates.
versus
LAKLITE FOOTWEAR
PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Defendants
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
ORDER
% 26.05.2023 I.A. 10496/2023(for exemption)
1. Subject to the plaintiff filing documents with proper margins and the original, clear, translated and legible copies of the documents on which the plaintiff may seek to place reliance, within four weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present.
2. The application is disposed of.
I.A. 10494/2023(u/S 12A of Commercial Courts Act)
3. In view of the urgent interim relief sought, the plaintiff is granted exemption from the requirement of pre-institution mediation in terms of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
4. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 10495/2023(O-XI R-1(4) of the Commercial Courts Act)
5. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 1 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27 seeking leave to file additional documents under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
6. The plaintiff is granted thirty days‟ time to file additional documents.
7. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 356/2023
8. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
9. Counsel for the plaintiff, along with plaint, has filed an affidavit of service in terms of which the copy of the plaint has been served to the defendants by way of email.
10. None appears on behalf of defendants despite advance service.
11. Issue summons.
12. Summons be issued to defendants through all modes. The summons shall state that the written statement(s) shall be filed by the defendants within thirty days from the date of the receipt of summons. Along with the written statement(s), the defendants shall also file affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.
13. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file replication, if any, within thirty days from the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication filed by the plaintiff, affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the defendants be filed by the plaintiff.
14. The parties shall file all original documents in support of their respective claims along with their respective pleadings. In case parties are placing reliance on a document, which is not in their power and possession, its detail and source shall be mentioned in the list of reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings.
CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 2 of 6This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27
15. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.
16. List before the Joint Registrar on 29th August, 2023 for completion of service and pleadings.
17. List before the Court on 5th October, 2023.
I.A. 10493/2023 (O-XXXIX R-1 & 2 of CPC)
18. The present suit has been filed on behalf plaintiff seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringement of trademark and copyright, passing off along with other ancillary reliefs.
19. The plaintiff company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of footwear of various kinds since the year 1976. Plaintiff company is also a listed company whose shares are listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange.
20. The plaintiff sells footwear products under various distinctive trademarks/labels and along with a unique get up and trade dress, including the house mark RELAXO, and various product specific brands like BAHAMAS, FLITE, SCHOOLMATE, SPARX etc.
21. The trademark „FLITE‟ was adopted by the plaintiff in the year 2000 in respect of footwear products mainly for slippers and sandals. The plaintiff has various registrations in its favour in respect of FLITE as well as FLITE formative marks, which are detailed in paragraph 9 of the plaint. The word mark „FLITE‟ has been registered by the plaintiff by the plaintiff on 1 st September, 2003.
22. The plaintiff has also filed sales turnover from the year 2004-05 to the year 2022-2023. The annual net sales turnover of the plaintiff in the year 2022-2023 was over Rs.1055 crores. Copies of sales invoices of the products CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 3 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27 under the mark „FLITE‟ have been filed on behalf of the plaintiff.
23. The plaintiff has also provided the promotional expenses incurred by it in respect of the "FLITE" trademark. In the financial year 2012-2013, the plaintiff spent around Rs.14.90 crores towards promotional expenses and from the financial year 2022-2023 the plaintiff spent round Rs.24.16 crores. By virtue of extensive use, the trademark „FLITE‟ has acquired immense reputation and goodwill in the market.
24. Defendant no.1 is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading and marketing of footwear products under the mark „ELITE‟ (hereinafter referred to as „impugned mark‟). Defendant no.2 is the applicant of the trademark application for the impugned mark.
25. Plaintiff in the month of April, 2022 became aware of the fact that the defendants are manufacturing and selling footwear products using a slavishly and deceptively similar trademark and logo "ELITE". Two cease and desist notices were sent on behalf of the plaintiff to the defendants on 27th April, 2022 and 5th July, 2022. A response on 19th July, 2022 was received by the plaintiff from the defendants, in which the defendants sought to differentiate its products from those of the plaintiff.
26. Subsequently, an FIR was filed by the plaintiff on 18th March, 2023, which resulted in seizure of large quantities of infringing goods copying the plaintiff‟s trademarks including but not limited to „FLITE‟, „SPARX‟, etc. along with goods bearing the mark „ELITE‟.
27. A comparison of the products of the plaintiff and the defendants is set out below:
Plaintiff's Mark FLITE Defendants Mark ELITE CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 4 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27
28. A perusal of the table above would show that the words „FLITE‟ and „ELITE‟ are visually identical, the only difference being that the letter „F‟ in the plaintiff‟s mark has been replaced by letter „E‟ in the defendants‟ impugned mark. Further, the manner and font styling of defendants‟ mark is identical to the plaintiff‟s mark and the same is being used in respect of identical products.
29. Issue notice.
30. Notice be issued to the defendants through all modes.
31. Reply(ies) be filed within four weeks.
32. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
33. Based on the averments in the plaint and submissions made on behalf of the plaintiff, a prima facie case has been made out on behalf of the plaintiff. Balance of convenience is in favour of the plaintiff. Irreparable CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 5 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27 harm would be caused to the plaintiff if an ex parte ad interim injunction as prayed is not granted in favour of the plaintiff.
34. Consequently, till the next date of hearing, the defendants, their Directors, principal officers, sister concerns, agents, servants and any other person acting for or on their behalf are restrained from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, importing, exporting or in any manner dealing in the products bearing impugned mark „ELITE‟ (word), logo or device , or any other identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff‟s registered „FLITE‟ trademarks.
35. Compliance under Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) be done within five days.
36. List before the Joint Registrar on 29th August, 2023 for completion of service and pleadings.
37. List before the Court on 5th October, 2023.
AMIT BANSAL, J.
MAY 26, 2023 rt CS(COMM) 356/2023 Page 6 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/09/2023 at 10:15:27