Madras High Court
Sun Knitting Company vs Sheshachala Hosiery Pvt Ltd on 22 June, 2021
C.S.No.608 of 2001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.608 of 2001
SUN KNITTING COMPANY
Rep. by its Partner
R.Damodharan,
No.172, Dharapuram Road,
Tirupur – 639 608. ...Plaintiff
.Vs.
SHESHACHALA HOSIERY PVT LTD.,
Plot No.88, Seetharam Nagar,
R.K.Puram (P.O.)
Secunderabad – 500 056. ... Defendant
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule (1) of Original Side Rules,
Section 27, 105 and 106 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958
and Section 55 of the Copyrights Act, 1957 seeking:
a) To grand a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers, distributors
or anyone claiming through them from committing infringement of
plaintiff's Registered Trade Mark 'SUN' and its distinctive device by
Page No.1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.608 of 2001
using the deceptively similar mark 'SON' or with deceptive get-up,
device and colour combination in relation to the Hosiery goods.
b) To grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers, and
distributors or anyone claiming through them from committing
'infringement of copyright' in the artistic work of plaintiff's distinctive
device 'SUN' by publishing, distributing, printing or cause to be printed
the impugned artistic work of the defendant's device 'SON'.
c) To grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers or any one
claiming through them from committing the 'passing off' their Hosiery
goods under the deceptive mark 'SON' as and for or being connected with
the business of the plaintiff.
d) To direct the defendant to surrender to the plaintiff all the
unused labels printed in cardboard, wrappers and other printed matters
containing or consisting of the offending trade mark together with blocks
used for the purpose of printing the same for destruction and
e) To direct the defendant to pay the plaintiff the cost of the suit.
For Plaintiff : No appearance
For Defendants : Mr.K.P.Ashok
********
Page No.2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.608 of 2001
JUDGMENT
The suit has been filed seeking
a) To grand a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers, distributors
or anyone claiming through them from committing infringement of
plaintiff's Registered Trade Mark 'SUN' and its distinctive device by
using the deceptively similar mark 'SON' or with deceptive get-up,
device and colour combination in relation to the Hosiery goods.
b) To grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers, and
distributors or anyone claiming through them from committing
'infringement of copyright' in the artistic work of plaintiff's distinctive
device 'SUN' by publishing, distributing, printing or cause to be printed
the impugned artistic work of the defendant's device 'SON'.
c) To grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendant by
themselves, its Directors, servants, licensees, agents, printers or any one
claiming through them from committing the 'passing off' their Hosiery
goods under the deceptive mark 'SON' as and for or being connected with
the business of the plaintiff.
Page No.3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.608 of 2001
d) To direct the defendant to surrender to the plaintiff all the
unused labels printed in cardboard, wrappers and other printed matters
containing or consisting of the offending trade mark together with blocks
used for the purpose of printing the same for destruction and
e) To direct the defendant to pay the plaintiff the cost of the suit.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the parties would submit that
they are unable to contact their respective parties. The suit is of the year
2001. It is almost 20 years now and the relief sought for is one of
permanent injunction in an infringement action.
3. In view of the disinterest shown by the plaintiff in not
responding to its counsel, the suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No
costs.
22.06.2021
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-speaking order
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil
Page No.4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.608 of 2001
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil
22.06.2021
dsa
Page No.5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.608 of 2001
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
C.S.No.608 of 2001
22.06.2021
Page No.6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
