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

Eupharma Laboratories Ltd vs / on 21 November, 2023

Author: Abdul Quddhose

Bench: Abdul Quddhose

                                                                                     C.S. No.1012 of 1998

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED 21.11.2023

                                                           CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                     C.S. No.1012 of 1998

                     Eupharma Laboratories Ltd.                                    .. Plaintiff

                                                            /versus/

                     Brawn and Burk Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.                      .. Defendant

                     Prayer: Civil Suit has been filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of the Original
                     Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure read with
                     Section 27, 105 and 106 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act 1958
                     and Section 55 and 62 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 prays for a
                     judgment and decree:
                                  a)granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their
                     men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from in
                     any manner infringing the plaintiff's Trademark "MALOXINE" by using
                     the offending Trademark "MALOXINE" or any other mark or marks
                     which are similar or in any way deceptively similar to or a colourable
                     imitation of the plaintiff's Trademark "MALOXINE" either by
                     manufacturing or selling or exporting or offering for sale or in any
                     manner advertising the same;
                                  b)granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their
                     men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/4
                                                                                          C.S. No.1012 of 1998

                     any manner passing off their pharmaceutical products as that of the
                     plaintiff's by using the offending Trademark "MALOXINE" as and for the
                     celebrated pharmaceutical products of the plaintiff's with the Trademark
                     "MALOXINE" either by manufacturing or selling or exporting or offering
                     for sale or in any manner advertising the same;
                                  c)granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their
                     men, servants, agents or anyone claiming through or under them from in
                     any manner infringing the plaintiff's copyright over the artistic work in
                     colour scheme, getup and layout in the plaintiff's MALOXINE cartons, by
                     using the offending MALOXINE cartons with identical colour scheme
                     getup or layout;
                                  d)directing the defendant to render a true and faithful account of
                     the profits earned by them through the sale of pharmaceutical products
                     bearing the offending trademark and the trading style "MALOXINE" and
                     directing payment of such profits to the plaintiff's by way of damages;
                                  e)directing the defendant to surrender to the plaintiff the entire
                     stock of unused offending goods with Trademark "MALOXINE" together
                     with offending cartons blocks and dyes for destruction;
                                  f)directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff's the costs of the suit.


                                        For Plaintiff : Mr.Prasanna Venkat for
                                                        Mr.A.Prabhakara Reddy


                                        For defendant        : Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     2/4
                                                                                        C.S. No.1012 of 1998

                                                        JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the plaintiff has reported no instructions in this matter since the plaintiff Company has been wound up. The suit is of the year 1998. Till date, the Liquidator has not entered appearance on behalf of the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the defendant is present. Since the suit is a very old suit, it can now be inferred that the plaintiff is not interested in prosecuting the suit. Accordingly, this suit is dismissed for non prosecution. No costs.

21.11.2023 vga https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4 C.S. No.1012 of 1998 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vga C.S. No.1012 of 1998 21.11.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4