Madras High Court
M/S.Mohamed Aboobacker Chank ... vs M/S.Savanth Ventures on 10 January, 2022
C.S.806 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated :10.01.2022
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
C.S.No.806 of 2015
(Comm. Suit)
M/s.Mohamed Aboobacker Chank Lungi Ltd.,
No.190, Thambu Chetty Street,
Chennai 600 001.
represented by its Managing Director
Mr.K.M.Umar Farook. .. Plaintiff
/versus/
1. M/s.Savanth Ventures,
1372, South End Road, 9th Block,
Jayanagar, Jayanagar East End Bus Stop,
Bangalore- 560 069.
2. Jasper Infotech Private Limited,
carrying on its online retail business through www.snapdeal.com,
Building No.246, 1st Floor,
Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III,
New Delhi-110020. ..Defendants
Prayer:
Civil Suit has been filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of the High Court
Original Side Rules read with Order VII, Rule 1 of C.P.C. read with
Sections 27, 28, 29, 134 & 135 of the TradeMarks Act, 1999 and
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
Sections 51, 55, 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, praying to pass a
judgment and decree for:-
(a) For permanent injunction, restraining the defendants by
themselves, their agents, servants, assigns, representatives or any one
claiming through them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's
registered trademarks SANGU and the device of conch as described in
the Schedule A hereunder by using the identical mark SANGU and/or the
offending deceptively similar label with the device of conch, or any other
mark, label or device which is identical or deceptively similar to or a
colourable imitation of the plaintiff's trademarks SANGU and the device
of conch;
(b) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants by
themselves, their agents, servants assigns, representatives or any one
claiming through them from in any manner infringing the copyright in the
artistic features associated with the plaintiff's artistic work Device of
Conch as contained in the Schedule B hereunder by using the offending
label with the device of Conch or any other mark, label or device, which
is a colourable imitation of the plaintiff's copyright in artistic work
Device of Conch either by manufacturing or selling or offering for sale or
in any way advertising the same or in any other manner whatsoever;
(c) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants by
themselves, their agents, servants, assigns, representatives or any one
claiming through them from in any manner passing off or enabling others
to pass off the defendants' products as and for that of the plaintiff's
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
products by using the identical trademark SANGU or through the
offending label with the device of Conch or any other trademark which is
identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademark SANGU, the
device of Conch and/or the SANGU label, either by manufacturing or
selling or offering for sale or in any way advertising the same or in any
other manner whatsoever;
(d) Ordering the defendants to pay to the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.50,00,000/- as liquidated damages for committing acts of
infringement against plaintiff's registered trademark and copyright and
also for acts of their passing off;
(e) Directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff entire
goods with the labels, packaging materials, stock of unused labels
together with the blocks and dyes, name boards, sign-boards, stationery
materials etc., containing the impugned mark SANGU and label with the
device of conch, for destruction;
(f) Directing the defendants to render true and faithful accounts of
the profits earned by them using the offending trademark SANGU and
label with the device of Conch and pay such profits to the plaintiff as
damages;
(g) directing the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the costs of the
suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.Prasanna Venkat
For Defendants : Mr.J.Venkatesh Kumar
for D2
------
3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
JUDGMENT
(The case has been heard through Video Conferencing)
This suit was filed by the plaintiff with a grievance that there is an
infringement of their registered trademark and accordingly, the plaintiff
had sought for various reliefs against the defendants.
2. It is seen from the records that the first defendant was initially
represented by a counsel. Thereafter, when the matter was posted for
hearing, none appeared for the first defendant and the written statement
was also not filed. This Court after affording sufficient opportunity, by
an order dated 13.08.2019 called the first defendant and set them ex-
parte. On the day when the first defendant was set ex-parte, the name of
the first defendant was also printed in the cause list.
3. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff and the second
defendant have entered into a compromise and the memorandum of
settlement has been filed before this Court which is signed by the
plaintiff, second defendant and their respective counsel. The relevant
portions of the memorandum of settlement are extracted hereunder:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
'1. The Defendant No.2 acknowledge and accept that
the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the trademark "SANGU",
"CHANK" and the device of Conch and the said trademarks
enjoy good reputation in India.
2. The Defendant No.2 submits to the decree in terms
of prayer (a), (b) and (c) in Para 31 of the plaint.
3. The plaintiff is not pressing the relief for damages as
claimed in prayer (d), (e) and (f) in para 31 of the plaint
accepting the plea that the defendant No.2 is innocent and
stopped marketing the products with the offending trademarks
immediately on coming to know of the plaintiff's rights over
the suit schedule trademarks.
4. The Defendant No.2 shall not make available on its
website viz., www.snapdeal.com, goods bearing the suit
schedule trademarks. However, in case the plaintiff comes
across any listing bearing the suit trademarks on the website
of Defendant No.2, the plaintiff shall report the said URLs to
the Defendant No.2 and the Defendant No.2 shall thereafter
take down the said listing from its platform within 48 hours of
such reporting.'
4. This Court after hearing the learned counsel appearing on either
side is convinced that the suit can be decreed in terms of memorandum of
settlement. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of memorandum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
settlement entered into between the plaintiff and the second defendant.
Insofar as the first defendant is concerned, they have not contested the
suit and ex-parte evidence has been let in by the plaintiff. This Court on
going through the pleadings and the evidence let in, is convinced that the
plaintiff will be entitled for a decree as against the first defendant with
regard to the reliefs sought for at paragraph No.30(a), (b), (c) and (e) of
the plaint. Insofar as the second defendant is concerned, the
memorandum of settlement entered into between the plaintiff and the
second defendant shall form part of the decree. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
10.01.2022
Index:yes/no
Speaking/Non-speaking
mk
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar
Original Side
High Court,
Madras.
N.ANAND VENKATESH. J.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.806 of 2015
mk
C.S.No.806 of 2015
(Comm. Suit)
10.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
