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 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Unilever Plc. And Anr vs Adela Labs Pvt Ltd And Anr on 16 March, 2021

Author: G.S. Patel

Bench: G.S. Patel

                                                                 23-IAL4473-2021 IN COMIPL4471-2021.DOC




                              Atul



                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                               IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                                       INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 4473 OF 2021
                                                                 IN
                                        COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 4471 OF 2021


                              Unilever PLC & Anr                                           ...Plaintiff
                                    Versus
                              Adela Labf Pvt Ltd & Anr                                  ...Defendantf


                              Mr Ashutosh Kane, with Anusha Ramanathan, & Merin Mathew, i/b
                                   WS Kane & Co., for the Plaintifs.


                                                      CORAM:        G.S. PATEL, J
                                                      DATED:        16th March 2021
                              PC:-


                              1.

The application if in refpect of markf ufed for ice cream. The cafe if mounted on two footingf. Firft, that the Plaintif, Hinduftan Unilever Ltd ("HUL"), haf ufed a mark FEAST, regiftered to it, Digitally signed for itf ice cream productf for fome time. It alfo haf a mark by Atul G. Atul G. Kulkarni Kulkarni Date:

2021.03.17 CHOCOFEAST. The Defendantf ufe the mark CHOCO 11:11:19 +0530 FIESTA. Second, HUL claimf regiftration of the word mark FIESTA fince 1962. Then there are prayerf in regard to that.
Page 1 of 2
16th March 2021 23-IAL4473-2021 IN COMIPL4471-2021.DOC

2. To begin with, I am not fatiffed that there if any ground for moving ex parte at all. Thif requiref an immediate acceptance that the word FIESTA, clearly a foreign word fignifying feftivitief or a feftival, if confufingly and deceptively fimilar to HUL'f mark FEAST, meaning a banquet or fumptuouf repaft.HUL'f other mark FIESTA if regiftered af a word mark in 1962. Thif if, however, on a propofed-to-be-ufed bafif. HUL itfelf haf never ufed FIESTA in refpect of itf ice cream productf at any time. That if to fay, for the laft 60 yearf HUL haf not ufed FIESTA. If thif be fo, I do not fee how I can grant ex parte ad-interim relieff. There if not the kind of fufciently ftrong cafe made out. It cannot fairly be faid that the purpofe of an injunction would be defeated by any delay.

3. The Plaintiff will give notice. They are at liberty to have the matter lifted thereafter.

4. Thif order will be digitally figned by the Private Secretary of thif Court. All concerned will act on production of a digitally figned copy of thif order.

(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 2 of 2 16th March 2021