Madras High Court
M/S.Mohan Meakin Ltd vs M/S.Balaji Distilleries Ltd on 2 November, 2021
C.S.No.178 of 2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.178 of 2005
1.M/s.Mohan Meakin Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory &
Power of Attorney
Shri.T.Krishnamurthy
Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh – 201 007.
2.M/s.Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Ltd.,
Rep. by its Company Secretary &
Vice President (Finance)
Shri.T.Krishnamurthy
Rayala Towers,
Chennai – 600 002. ...Plaintiffs
.Vs.
M/s.Balaji Distilleries Ltd.,
No.9, Bazullah Road,
T.Nagar,
Chennai – 600 017. ... Defendant
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read
with Sections 134 and 135 of the trade Marks Act, 1999 praying for the
following judgment and decree:
Page No.1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.178 of 2005
a) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its men, agents,
assignees, dealers and/ or retailers from infringing the 1st plaintiff's
registered trademark 'Old Monk' vide T.M.No.273257 by using offending
mark 'Old King' or any other mark deceptively similar or identical with that
of the plaintiff's registered trade mark 'Old Monk' for marketing XXX Rum
and / or any alcoholic beverage classifiable in class 32 or 33 of IV
schedule to the Trade Marks Rules, 2002;
b) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its men, agents,
assignees, dealers and/ or retailers from infringing the 1st plaintiff's 'Old
Monk' label registered vide T.M.no.432911 by using offending label
having similar getup and colour scheme bearing words 'Old King' or any
other label deceptively similar or identical with that of the plaintiff's 'Old
Monk' label for marketing XXX Rum and/ or any alcoholic beverage
classifiable in class 32 or 33 of the IV schedule to the Trade Marks Rules,
2002;
c) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its men, agents,
assignees and dealers, retailers from selling and/ or using and/ or adopting
the offending label for their 'Old King' XXX Rum similar and/ or
deceptively identical with that of the 'Old Monk' label of the plaintiffs.
d) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant, its men and
agents from diluting the plaintiffs' 'Old Monk' XXX Rum label by using or
Page No.2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.178 of 2005
adopting similar and/ or deceptively on identical label with a similar colour
scheme, get-up for marketing their alcoholic beverages in particular 'Old
King' XXX Rum.
e) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using or
adopting bottles bearing MBDL logo for selling their XXX Rum or any
other alcoholic beverage;
f) Direct the defendant to deliver to the plaintiff for destruction all
offending labels, packing materials, and 'Old King' XXX Rum bearing
offending label manufactured by the defendant offered for sale or proposed
to be offer for sale in violation of plaintiffs proprietary rights over the 'Old
Monk' XXX Rum label;
g) Direct the defendant to render true account of profit made by
them on sale of 'Old King' XXX Rum bearing offending label in violation
of the first plaintiff's proprietary rights over the 'Old Monk' XXX Rum
label and
h) to pay costs of the suit.
For Plaintiffs : Mr.M.Rajendiran
For Defendant : Mr.Rahul Balaji
********
Page No.3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.178 of 2005
JUDGMENT
The suit is one for infringement of trademark, which is a
commercial action within the meaning of Section 2(1)(c)(xvii) of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The jurisdiction is thus determined and
this Commercial Division takes cognizance of the suit.
2. A perusal of the records would show that the parties have
entered into a compromise in O.S.A.Nos.223 to 228 of 2005. The
operative portion of the order in the said Original Side Appeals which is
passed on a joint compromise memo reads as follows:-
“The appellants/ plaintiffs agree to
withdraw the present appeals on the basis of this
compromise and also withdraw C.S.No.178 of
2005 as settled out of Court.”
3. In view of the above, the suit is dismissed as settled out of
Court. No costs.
02.11.2021
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-Speaking order
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiffs: Nil
Page No.4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.178 of 2005
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiffs : Nil
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendant: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendant: Nil
02.11.2021
dsa
Page No.5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.178 of 2005
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
C.S.No.178 of 2005
02.11.2021
Page No.6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
