Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Alberto Culver Co. Versus Pioneer Products BA+

2010 (8) TMI 1097 - DELHI HIGH COURT

CS (OS) 672/2004, I.A. Nos. 3884/2004 and 8329/2006 - Dated:- 27-8-2010 - S. Ravindra Bhat, J. For the Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: S.K. Bansal and Pankaj Kumar, Advs. For the Respondents/Defendant: N.K. Kantawala, Satender Chahar and Praver Sharma, Advs. JUDGMENT S. Ravindra Bhat, J. 1. This order will dispose of the plea taken by the Defendant as to the maintainability of the present suit on the allegation that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit. 2. The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

injunction and damages contending, inter alia, that the latter applied for registration of the similar mark and is also unauthorizedly using it. 3. The Defendant filed the written statement resisting the suit and urging that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction. The pleadings indicate that the Defendant is a Thane based concern and registered in Maharashtra. Admittedly, it applied for registration of the mark "VOV" in Delhi - to which the Plaintiff has an objection. It is contend .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ith it dated 1st July 1992. XXX XXX XXX 26. The cause of action arose in favour of the Plaintiff firstly in the month of March, 2004 as set out hereinabove, when the Plaintiff for the first time learnt about the Defendant's impugned adoption and impugned Trade mark and impugned registration application. The cause of action further arose in April, 2004 when the Defendant replied to the said legal notice wherein they refused to accede to the just and legal requisitions of the Plaintiff. The De .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eir inquiry, handing out instructions as also in preparing and finalizing the legal papers. 27. This Hon'ble Court has territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit. The Defendant has sought registration of the impugned Trade Mark on an all India basis which includes Delhi the Defendant as such has all the intentions to use the impugned Trade Mark in Delhi if not already used. The Defendant is carrying on, their impugned goods and business activities under the impugned Trade .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

de marks Act, 1999. 4. This Court had declined ex parte relief and the injunction application has been pending all these years. In the meanwhile, by order dated 25.11.2005, the Court proceeded to frame issues on the basis of the pleadings and materials on the record. There is no dispute that the first issue concerns the maintainability of the suit on the question of territorial jurisdiction. 5. The Plaintiff contends that an overall reading of the suit as well as the materials on record should l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has goodwill and reputation and its products are traded in Delhi. Learned counsel submits that the Plaintiff appointed a distributor who has appointed a sub distributor /agent in Delhi - who is marketing the Plaintiffs products within the jurisdiction of this Court. It is submitted on this score that the provisions of Section-134 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 are fulfilled. 6. Learned counsel submitted that having framed the issues with regard to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of ju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

into the suit and the documents placed on record. It is pointed out that none of the material averments disclosed that the Plaintiff is either residing (i.e. registered within the jurisdiction of the Court) or has any office - or conducts its business through any licensee so as to attract the provisions of Section-134. So far as the documents are concerned, it is submitted that none of the invoices placed on the record disclosed that the Plaintiffs products are sold in Delhi. It is submitted th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es, it cannot be said that the Defendant is carrying on business for gain in Delhi, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Learned counsel for the Defendant urges that the question of trial, at least in this case, would not arise because the Plaintiffs material evidence in the form of documents have already been placed on record and no additional evidence has been brought on record after the issues were framed on 25.11.2005. It is pointed that the argument about appointment of a di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion in Dhodha House v. S.K. Maingi, 2006 (9) SCC 41 : 2006 (32) PTC 1 [SC] and Dabur India Ltd. v. K.R. Industries, 2008 (10) SCC 595 : 2008 (37) PTC 332 [SC]. In Dhodha House case, the Supreme Court held that the mere fact that the goods are available in a particular place - in that instance in Delhi or that they were sold in different area, would not itself mean that the Plaintiff carried on any business in Delhi. This Court is bound by that ruling. The materials on record, particularly the pl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ection-134, is not maintainable. 9. So far as question as to whether any part of the cause of action has arisen in the jurisdiction of this Court is concerned, the documents available in the form of about 557 pages filed along with the list of documents would reveal that there is no material establishing that the Defendant sold their products within the jurisdiction of this Court or anywhere in Delhi. No doubt, the Plaintiff has a right to adduce the evidence in the trial to establish the Defend .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version