Thursday, August 1, 2024

Escorts Ltd Vs Sudhir Kumar

Background and Plaintiff's Allegations:

The plaintiff, Escorts Ltd., is engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of various equipment, including railway equipment.

The plaintiff had obtained registered designs for 'AAR-H type Couplers' and 'Buffer Couplers'.

The defendant, Sudhir Kumar, is a former employee of the plaintiff who was working in the Engineering Division responsible for the production of railway equipment.

The plaintiff apprehended that the defendant, after leaving the plaintiff's employment, had started a proprietary concern (defendant no. 2) and intended to use the plaintiff's registered designs to participate in a railway tender for supplying AAR-H type Couplers.

Ex-parte Ad-interim Injunction Granted:

Based on the plaintiff's apprehension, the court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from using or transferring the designs and data of the plaintiff's registered designs of AAR-H type Couplers.
The court also appointed a Local Commissioner to inspect the defendants' premises and seize any infringing goods or materials.

Findings from Local Commissioner's Report:

The Local Commissioner's report identified 24 infringing parts of the Couplers at the defendants' premises and also listed the machinery used for manufacturing the Couplers.

Photographs of the infringing goods were taken, and the industrial drawings/designs of the Couplers were seized and handed over to the defendants.

Court's Observations and Conclusion:

The ex-parte ad-interim injunction was granted merely on the basis of the fact that the defendant was a former employee and had applied for a railway tender, without any prima facie finding of design infringement.

The 'imminent threat of substantial damages', which was the basis for granting the quia timet action, is no longer present as the tender in question has concluded.

The plaintiff has not been able to demonstrate how the products photographed by the Local Commissioner infringe the plaintiff's registered designs, despite having access to the seized designs.

In the absence of any prima facie proof of infringement, the court concluded that the ad-interim injunction cannot be sustained any longer and vacated the order dated 5th July, 2018.

Case Citation: Escorts Ltd Vs Sudhir Kumar: 20.05.2024: CS(COMM) 271/2019: Delhi High Court: Prathiba M Singh: H.J.

Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman
IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney]

No comments:

Post a Comment

Featured Post

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PROVE THE TRADEMARK  REGISTRA...

My Blog List

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Search This Blog