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 6, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M/S.Micro-Pak Ltd vs Radhika Sales on 13 September, 2019

Author: N.Sathish Kumar

Bench: N.Sathish Kumar

                                                                                C.S.No.721 of 2017

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      Dated : 13.09.2019

                                                           CORAM

                                    THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                                  C.S.No.721 of 2017 &

                            O.A.Nos.1037 & 1039 of 2018 & A.Nos.8794 of 2018 & 1437 of 2019

                      1 M/s.Micro-Pak Ltd.,
                        Suite 2504, 25/F, Tower 6,
                        The Gateway, Harbour City
                        9, canton Road, Tsim Sha Tsul,
                        Kowloon, Hong Kong,
                        Represented by its Power of Attorney holder,
                        Mr.Sateesh Jadhav

                      2 M/s.Gaitonde Leathers and Accessories P Ltd.,
                        Corium House, Alsa Garden Complex, A Block,
                        V Floor, 58, Harrington Road, Chetpet,
                        Chennai – 600 031.
                        Represented by its Managing Director,
                        Mr.Sateesh Jadhav                                       ... Plaintiffs

                                                               Vs

                      Radhika Sales,
                      No.25/196, Naya Bans,
                      Loha Mandi,
                      Agra – 292 002, Uttar Pradesh
                      India.                                                    ... Defendant


                             Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules of Madras

                      High Court read with Sections 27, 134 and 135 of Trade Marks Act, 1999 read


                      1/6



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                    C.S.No.721 of 2017

                      with sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act 1957 for the following judgment

                      and decree :

                            A.    A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors,

                      stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person

                      claiming under them from in any manner infringing the 1st plaintiff's registered

                      trademark “Micro-pak” by manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking,

                      advertising anti-microbial Stickers or any moisture management and mould

                      prevention products or any other stickers or product or goods using the Trade

                      Mark Micro-Pak or any other trade mark/s which is/are identical with or

                      deceptively similar to the 1st plaintiff's registered Trade Mark “Micro-Pak” or in

                      any other manner whatsoever;

                            B.    A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors,

                      stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person

                      claiming under them from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale,

                      stocking, advertising any anti-microbial stickers or any moisture management

                      and mould prevention products or any other stickers or product or goods under

                      the trade mark Micro-Pak or any other trade mark/s which is/are identical with or

                      deceptively similar to the 1st plaintiff's Trade Mark (i) Micro-Pak, (ii) Micro-Pak

                      Green Label (filed as plaint Document No.2), or (iii) Micro-Pak Trade Dress (filed

                      as Document No.3) so as to pass off the defendant's products as and for those


                      2/6



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                        C.S.No.721 of 2017

                      of the first plaintiff's products or in any manner connected with the 1st plaintiff.

                             C) A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors,

                      stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person

                      claiming under them from in any manner infringing the copyright of the first

                      plaintiffs artistic work namely (i) Micro-Pak, (ii) Micro-Pak Green Label (filed as

                      plaint Document No.2), or (iii) Micro-Pak Trade Dress (filed as Document No.3)

                      or any other artistic works which are a substantial reproduction of the 1st

                      plaintiff's said artistic works or in any other manner whatsoever;

                             D) the defendant be ordered to surrender to plaintiff for destruction all the

                      defendant's counterfeit products, packets, labels, dyes, blocks, moulds, screen

                      prints, packing materials and other materials bearing the 1st plaintiff's

                      Trademarks, Artistic works or any other trademark/artistic work which is/are

                      deceptively similar to that of the1st plaintiff;

                             E) A preliminary decree be passed in favour of the first plaintiff directing

                      the defendant to render account of profits made by use of first plaintiff's said

                      trademarks/Artistic Works and the trade marks/ artistic works and a final decree

                      be passed in favour of the 1st plaintiff for the amount of profits thus found to have

                      been made by the defendant, after the latter have rendered accounts;

                             F) the defendant be ordered and decreed to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of

                      Rs.25,01,000/- as damages for acts of passing off and infringement of copyright


                      3/6



http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                     C.S.No.721 of 2017

                      committed by the defendant till date.

                            G) for costs of the suit.

                                          For Plaintiffs      : Mr.Narayana Prasad

                                          For defendant       : Mr.R.Sathish Kumar


                                                           JUDGMENT

When the matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and the defendant submitted that the parties have entered into Joint Compromise Memo and they have settled the matter as per the compromise memo executed by the parties. The learned counsel has also produced Joint Compromise Memo entered between parties. The learned counsel further submitted that the suit may be decreed in terms of the compromise memo.

2. In view of the same, this suit is decreed in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo and the Joint Compromise Memo shall form part of the decree. Subsequently, the connected applications are closed. No cost.

13.09.2019 vrc Index : Yes/No 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.S.No.721 of 2017 Internet : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.S.No.721 of 2017 N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

vrc C.S.No.721 of 2017 13.09.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in