KRBL LTD VS RAKESH SETHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
 
 
 
  CS(OS) 1470/2013
 
 
 
  KRBL LTD ..... Plaintiff
 
  Through Mr. S.K. Bansal, Mr. Santosh Kumar and Mr. A.A. Suman, Adv.
 
 
 
 
versus
 
 
 
  RAKESH SETHI ..... Defendant
 
  Through None.
 
 
 
  CORAM:
 
   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
 
   O R D E R
 
   29.07.2013
 
  IA. 11734/2013 (exemption)
 
  Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
 
  CS(OS) No. 1470/2013
 
  Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
 
  Issue summons to the defendant by ordinary and speed post,
  returnable for 19.09.2013.
 
  I.A. 11733/2013 (u/O 39 R 1 and 2 CPC)
 
  Issue notice to the defendant by ordinary process and speed post,
  returnable on 19th September, 2013.
 
  This is an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. The
  case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff, through its predecessors, in
  the year 1993 adopted and started using the trade mark/ label INDIA GATE
  with device of INDIA GATE in respect of rice business. The plaintiff has
  been carrying on
 
  CS(OS) 1470/2013 page 1 of 3
 
  its business in India as well as overseas, the details of which are
  mentioned in para 6 of the plaint. The application for registration of
  said trademark is already pending since 17.03.1999 and other applications
  are also pending claiming the user since 1993. The plaintiff is also
  promoting the said trade mark through various print media as well as
  entertainment channels e.g. Star T.V., Aaj Tak, NDTV and India TV.
 
  According to the plaintiff the said trade mark has acquired primary
  significant with the goods and business of the plaintiff and in view of
  the unique goodwill and reputation it has earned, it has become well-
  known trade mark within the meaning of Section 2(1) (zg) of the Trade
  Marks Act, 1999.
 
  The details of the various applications made by the plaintiff for
  registration of its trade mark INDIA GATE in various classes has been
  elaborated in para 11 of the plaint. The sales of the plaintiff under the
  trade mark and label of INDIA GATE are elaborated in para 16 of the
  plaint. It now alleged that the defendant has recently adopted the device
  of INDIA GATE in relation to his goods and business and that the trade
  mark/label /domain name of the defendant in relation to its impugned
  goods and business is identical with the plaintiff?s trade mark in each
  and every respect phonetically, visually, structurally and its basic
  idea. It is further stated that the action of the defendant is in
  violation of the plaintiff?s aforesaid trade mark and thereby passing off
  to enable others to pass off their goods and business as that of the
  plaintiff.
 
  The plaintiff has made out a prima facie case in its favour. Balance
  of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff. In case an ex parte ad
  interim
 
  CS(OS) 1470/2013 page 2 of 3
 
  injunction is not granted, the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss and
  injury.
 
  In view of the above, the defendant, his agents and servants are
  restrained by way of an ex parte ad interim injunction from using the
  trade mark INDIA GATE with the device INDIA GATE or any other trade
  mark/label/domain name identical with or deceptively similar thereto in
  relation to their goods and business of grains, spices, tea and allied
  and other goods till further orders.
 
  Plaintiff shall comply with provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC
  within a period of five days.
 
 
    JAYANT NATH, J
 
  JULY 29, 2013/RB
 
  CS(OS) 1470/2013 page 3 of 3
 
 
 
  $ A31
  

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
 
 
 
  CS(OS) 1470/2013 and IA No. 11733/2013
 
 
 
  KRBL LTD ..... Plaintiff
 
  Through Mr. Ajay Maitabh Suman and Mr.Dharmendra Tyagi, Advocate
 
 
 
 
versus
 
 
 
  RAKESH SETHI ..... Defendant
 
  Through Defendant-in-person.
 
  CORAM:
 
   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
 
   O R D E R
 
   19.09.2013
 
  Defendant has appeared in person. A photocopy of his identify card,
  namely, the driving licence is taken on record. Defendant states that he
  does not intend to use the impugned trade mark ?INDIA GATE? or the domain
  name ?www.indiagategroup.com? or ?India Gate Industries?. He submits
  that he will abide by this undertaking.
 
  In view of the said undertaking given by the defendant, the present
  suit is decreed in terms of para 42(a) of the plaint. The defendant shall
  abide by the statement made in Court. The plaintiff does not press other
  reliefs.
 
  All pending applications stand disposed of.
 
 
 
  JAYANT NATH, J
 
  SEPTEMBER 19, 2013
 
  rb
 
 
 
  $ A8