Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 735 - HC - CustomsImport of goods - infringement of the Intellectual Property Rights of the plaintiffs - Seeking impleadment in the present suit as a proper party - Infringement of trade marks - violation of paragraph 2.3 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20 - HELD THAT:- The Supreme Court in MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD. VERSUS REGENCY CONVENTION CENTRE & HOTELS PVT. LTD. & ORS. [2010 (7) TMI 1159 - SUPREME COURT], has observed that the general rule with regard to impleadment of parties is that the plaintiff in a suit, being dominus litis, may choose the persons against whom he wishes to litigate and cannot be compelled to sue a person against whom he does not seek any relief. No relief has been sought against the applicant. The entire case of the plaintiff is based on the infringement of the trademarks of the plaintiffs by the defendant. Therefore, it cannot be said that an effective decree cannot be passed in the present suit in the absence of the applicant. It is not even the case of the applicant that the applicant is a necessary party, as the present application seeks impleadment only on the basis of the applicant being a proper party - In terms of the legal position, for a person to be a proper party to a suit, it is to be seen whether the presence of such person would enable the Court to completely, effectively and properly adjudicate upon the issue in the case. The applicant has the jurisdiction to determine if the seized goods are infringing the Intellectual Property Rights of the plaintiffs, only in the event of no legal proceedings being pending in relation to such determination. However, the present suit is such a legal proceeding in which a determination is to be made whether the goods imported by the defendant are infringing or not. Therefore, in terms of Rule 11 of IPR Enforcement Rules, the applicant cannot go into the question of infringement till the final adjudication of the present suit - In the event, this Court comes to a finding that the defendant has not infringed the trademarks of the plaintiffs, the said determination shall be binding on the applicant and there cannot be any question of destruction of the infringing goods. On the other hand, if a final determination is made by this Court that the goods have infringed the trademarks of the plaintiffs, appropriate orders shall be passed with regard to the aforesaid goods. The applicant is neither a necessary party nor a proper party for the adjudication of the suit. There is no merit in the present application and the same is dismissed.
|