Calcutta High Court
Khadim India Limited vs M/S. Bharat Plastics & Ors on 17 December, 2018
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen
OD-18
ORDER SHEET
GA No. 3385 of 2018
CS No. 254 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
KHADIM INDIA LIMITED
Versus
M/S. BHARAT PLASTICS & ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
Date : 17th December, 2018.
Appearance:
Mr. D.Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. P.R. Sinha, Adv.
Mr. A. Chandra, Adv.
Mr. D. Mukhopadhyay, Adv.
Mr. S. Ghosh, Adv.
Ms. A Pandey, Adv.
The Court :- The petitioner in addition to adoption and continuous
use of the housemark `Khadim's' since 1965 in course of business of footwear
and accessories from time to time also, conceived of and/or created and/or
designed and/or developed various designs, brands and labels for the purpose
marketing various kinds of footwear products and other accessories. The
petitioner conceived and adopted a unique, original and novel design to be
applied on footwear and consequently applied for registration of the same and got
the same registered on April 17, 2016 under the provisions of the Designs Act,
2000 under design registration No. 286115 in Class 02-04. The petitioner
2
contents that upon launching of the product there has been huge response from
the customers and public at large and over short span of time the product
attained extensive popularity and market share in the product category through
substantial sale. Recently, the petitioner has came to know that the respondents
are manufacturing, advertising and selling identical goods under an identical design along with the similar colour combination, getup and style as that of the petitioner.
Mr. Debnath Ghosh, learned Counsel representing the petitioner has produced before this Court the footwear of the petitioner as also the infringing footwear. On a visual comparison of the two footwears, it appears that the infringing footwear is a slavish imitation of the footwear of the petitioner save and except the colour. The two products appear to be identical. The petitioner as it appears is the owner of the registered design in relation to the said footwear in which the petitioner has claimed novelty in the shape, configuration and surface pattern of the footwear as illustrated in the sheet appended to the certificate of registration. Use of the design by the respondents impugned in the suit infringes the petitioner's registered design.
Under such circumstances, there will be an order in terms of prayer
(a) of the petition. The interim order shall continue for a period of 8 (eight) weeks or until further order whichever is earlier.
Ms. Tanusri Pal Chowdhuri, Advocate, is appointed as Special Officer to make an inventory of all the infringing goods and products with impugned designs and file a report on the adjourned date. The Special Officer, however, 3 shall not disturb and/or interfere with the running of the business of the respondents.
The Special Officer shall be entitled to an initial remuneration of 3000 GMs.
In the event Special Officer is prevented by the respondents for implementing this order, on a written request being made, the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station shall render assistance to the Special Officer forthwith.
The matter is made returnable on 16th January, 2019.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) snn.