Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K. Madhana Gopal vs Santhanagopalan Srinivasan on 29 January, 2024

Author: Abdul Quddhose

Bench: Abdul Quddhose

                                                                     C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 29.01.2024

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                        C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023


                     K. Madhana Gopal
                     trading as M/s. KMP Industrries
                     No. 312/192 A. Sathiya Nagar,
                     M.T.H.Road, Villivakkam,
                     Chennai-600 049.                          ...               Plaintiff

                                                      Vs.

                     1. Santhanagopalan Srinivasan,
                     trading as M/s. Goodwill Industries,
                     No.5/555-2, Annai Velankanni Nagar,
                     Arumugagoundanoor,
                     Coimbatore - 641 010.

                     2. Santhanagopalan Srinivasan,
                     trading as M/s. Swathi Packs,
                     543a, Krishna Nagar,
                     Arumugagoundanur,
                     Perur, Coimbatore - 641010.

                     3. M/s. Karnataka Motor Pumps
                     no.182/1 K-17/A Ramavilas Road,
                     K.R. Mohalla, Mysore,
                     Karnataka-570024.
                     Rep by its Partner D. Ganesamoorthi.

                     PRAYER : PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 CPC READ

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/6
                                                                        C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023


                     WITH SECTIONS 27, 28, 134 AND 135 OF THE TRADE MARKS
                     ACT, 1999, SECTIONS 51, 55 AND 62 OF THE COPYRIGHTS ACT,
                     1957 AND THE COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2012 AND
                     SECTION 7 OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, ACT, 2015 – SUIT
                     FOR          PERMANENT INJUNCTION FOR INFRINGMENT AND
                     PASSING OFF to grant a judgment and decree on the following terms :
                                  (a) a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants by
                     themselves, their Partners/ Proprietor, as the case may be, affiliates,
                     manufacturers, distributors, stockists, marketers, servants, agents,
                     wholesalers, retailers, legal representatives, successor in business or any
                     other person claiming under or through from in any manner
                     manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, trading, advertising
                     directly or indirectly dealing in motor pumps and pipes infringing the
                     Plaintiff’s registered trademark KMP by use of an identical mark SMP or
                     any mark deceptively similar to Plaintiff’s registered trademark KMP or
                     in any other manner whatsoever;


                                  (b) a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants by
                     themselves,        their Partners/Proprietor as the case may be, affiliates,
                     manufacturers, distributors, stockists, marketers, servants, agents,
                     wholesalers, retailers, legal representatives, successor in business or any
                     other person claiming under or through from in any manner
                     manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, trading, advertising
                     directly or indirectly dealing in motor pumps and pipes infringing the
                     Plaintiff’s copyright over the artistic work in the unique label/logo * by

                     use of an identical mark # or any mark deceptively similar to Plaintiff’s
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     2/6
                                                                       C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023


                     label/logo * or in any other manner whatsoever;


                                  (c) a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants by
                     themselves, their Partners/Proprietor as the case may be, affiliates,
                     manufacturers, distributors, stockists, marketers, servants, agents,
                     wholesalers, retailers, legal representatives, successor in business or any
                     other person claiming under or through from in any manner passing off
                     or enabling other to pass off the Defendants’ products as and for that of
                     Plaintiff's products        by manufacturing, selling, offering to sell,
                     distributing, stocking, displaying, printing, advertising using the

                     trademarks SMP and label/logo # that is identical to Plaintiff's
                     trademark KMP and logo/label * or in any manner whatsoever;


                                  (d) the Defendant be ordered to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of
                     Rs.1,00,000/- as damages for committing acts of infringement against
                     Plaintiff’s registered trademark and pass off its products as and for the
                     Plaintiff’s products;


                                  (e) the Defendants be ordered to surrender to Plaintiff for
                     destruction of all products, labels, cartons, visiting cards, leaflets,
                     promotional materials, broachers, dyes, blocks, moulds, screen prints,
                     packing materials and other materials using the infringing trademark
                     SMP and # or any other trademark identical or deceptively similar to
                     that of Plaintiff's trademark KMP;



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     3/6
                                                                            C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023


                                  (f) a preliminary decree be passed in favor of the Plaintiff directing
                     the Defendants to render accounts of profits made using the trademark
                     SMP and logo/label # and a final decree be passed in favor of Plaintiff
                     for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by Defendants
                     after verifying the accounts.


                                  (g) for costs of the suit; and


                                  (h) pass such further or other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may
                     deem fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case and thus render
                     justice.




                     * denotes logo SMP in prayer portion



                     # denotes logo SMP in prayer portion

                                        For Plaintiff              : Mr.H.Ashok Sankar Karthikeyan
                                        For Defendants             : Mr.K.S. Saravanan

                                                           JUDGMENT

All the parties have arrived at a settlement. They have filed a Memorandum of Compromise, dated 29.01.2024 before this Court. All the parties have signed the Memorandum of Compromise and the Memorandum of Compromise has also been counter signed by both the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023 learned counsels. In addition to the terms incorporated in the Memorandum of Compromise, both the learned counsels in the presence of their respective clients would submit that the defendants will be addressing a letter to the Trademark Registry seeking for cancellation of the Trademark Registration for the Trademark SMP and a copy of the same will also be furnished to the plaintiff on or before 30.01.2024. The learned counsel for the plaintiff is also agreeable to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the defendants. In terms of the Memorandum of Compromise, the suit is decreed and in addition to the terms and conditions of Memorandum of Compromise, an undertaking given by the defendants that they shall take appropriate steps for cancellation of the trademark registration in respect of trademark SMP is also recorded by this Court. The Memorandum of Compromise shall form part of this judgement.

29.01.2024 Index: Yes/ No Speaking order / Non speaking order Neutral citation : Yes / No vsi2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vsi2 C.S. (COMM. DIV.) No.174 of 2023 29.01.2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6