Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: amphetamine in Drugdeal Corporation vs Smith on 26 October, 1967Matching Fragments
(1) This Execution First Appeal is directed against an order made by the District Judge, Delhi whereby the appellants' immovable property has been ordered to be attached under Order 21 rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2) The appellants are a partnership firm manufacturine; and dealing in drugs and medicines while the respondents aie world renowned manufacturers of drugs and medicinal preparations in England. On October 1, 19132 a decree was passed by Shri P P. R. Sawhney, then District Judge, Delhi in a suit brought against the appellants by the respondents for perpetual injunction inter alia, to restrain The appellants, their servants and agents from using the get up of the respondents' products and using the letter Skf on their dextro amphetamine sulphate preparation. sold under the trade mark Sekifon in tablet forms so as to pass off their tablets or causing or permitting to be passed off the same as and for those of the respondents' dextro-amphetamine sulphate tablets. The parties arrived at a compromise and agreed to certain terms upon which a decree was paused in favor of the respondents. The material portion of the decree which is relevant for the purpose of the present appeal is as under : ".....it is o:dercd that a decree for perpetual injuction, in view of the statements of the parties of even date passed on the deed of compromise hled along with its consent terms, be and the same is hereby granted in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendants, restraining the latter, their servants and agents from using the same get up as of the plaintiffs and the trade mark Sekifon and letters 'SKF' on the dextro-amphetamine sulphate (USP) preparation and thereby from passing off and or causing or permitting to be passed of dextro amphetamine (USP) nto of the plaintiffs' manufacture as and for such medcine and that the defendants will nto, directly or indirectly, themselves or through any associate concerns use tablets or any toher product bearing the get up or trademarks complained of in the plaint. Further that the defendants themselves and their agents and servants will nto use the trade mark "SKF" or any toher mark which is a colourable imitation of the said trade mark of the plaintiffs on any of their products, packets, containers, labels or literature or adopt any device indicating a connection with the plaintiffs, that the defendants will hand over to the plaintiffs or to their representatives within seven days from the date hereof all cartons, labels, blocks, dies, slabs and advertising materials bearing the letters Skf thereon, and that they (defendants) will crush all stocks of tablets in their possession, power or control, nto of the plaintiffs' manufacture bearing the letters "SKF ' and will also arrange with their associate concerns to crush stocks of tablets in the possession or control of powers of their said associate concerns in the presence of a representative appointed by the plaintiffs within seven days from the date therect"
(3) The appellants also agreed to pay to the respondents Rs. 2000.00 as costs.
(4) On March 27, 1964, the respondents-decree holders filed an application in the court of the learned District Judge, Delhi praying for execution of the decree on the ground that the appellants-judgment debtors had willfully failed to obey the decree, the relief claimed in the application was that Inder Sain Jain, Satya Pal Jain and Subash Chander Jain who were partners in the judgment-debtor firm be committed to civil prison or toherwise dealt with in accordance with law for disobedience of the consent decree passed against them. It was stated in the application that the decree holders had received information that the judgment debtors weie surreptitiously marketing or selling or causing to be sold in various places in India, dextro amphetamine tablets bearing the same get up as the product of the decree holders and having the letters "SKF". The application specifically mentioned the name of a firm called Ujjagar Singh Sethi and Brtohers Ktoa (Rajasthan) as the dealer to whom the judgment debtors had supplied after the passing of the decree, dextro-amphe amuie sulphate tabets with the words Skf imprinted on them and being identical to the get up of the decree holders' product.