Madras High Court
Kishore – Sons Detergent (P) Ltd vs S.S.Detergents on 21 September, 2021
C.S.No.336 of 2001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.336 of 2001
Kishore – Sons Detergent (P) Ltd.,
14-6-86, Chudi Bazar,
Hyderabad – 500 012. ...Plaintiff
Vs.
S.S.Detergents,
Tadpatni – 515 411. ...Defendant
Prayer: Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side rules and Sections 105 & 106 of the
Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, praying as follows:-
a) granting a permanent injunction restraining the defendant by
themselves, their servants, agents or anyone claiming through them from
manufacturing and selling and offering for sale using the offending
trademark as found in Document No.3 (ETA wrapper) in any colour or any
other Trade Mark which is in any way deceptively / phonetically similar to
or a colourable imitation of the trademark found in Plaintiffs registered
trademark No.474088 filed as Document No.2 herein or infringing any of
the essential feature of the trademark found in the registered trademark of
the plaintiffs or in any manner infringing the plaintiffs registered Trade
Mark No.474088 in class 3 for detergent cake.
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.336 of 2001
b) directing the defendant to render a true and faithful accounts of
the profits earned by them through the manufacture and sale of the
offending trademark Document No.3 and directing such profits to be paid to
the plaintiffs by way of damages for the infringement and passing off
committed by the Defendant.
c) directing the Defendant to surrender to the Plaintiffs all the
cartons, labels and any other matters containing or consisting of the
trademark Document No.3 together with blocks used for the purpose of
printing the same for destruction.
d) directing the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs the costs of the
suit.
For Plaintiff : Mrs.Gladys Daniel
For Defendant : Unserved
JUDGMENT
Despite attempts, service on the defendant could not be
completed. Mrs.Gladys Daniel, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff
would seek permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit, if
cause of action arise in future.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.336 of 2001
2.The suit being one for infringement of the trademark, which has
a continuous cause of action, the request of the counsel is acceded to and
this suit is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit, if there is
a fresh cause of action. No costs.
21.09.2021
kkn
Internet:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-Speaking
List of witness and documents filed on the side of the plaintiff:
Nil
List of witness and documents filed on the side of the defendant:
Nil
21.09.2021
kkn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.336 of 2001
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
KKN
C.S.No.336 of 2001
21.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
