Very brief facts: The plaintiff, Coromandel Indag Products India Ltd., part of the Coromandel Group, filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against the defendants to restrain them from using the trademark PADAN and its packaging, claiming proprietary rights and alleging infringement and passing off. The plaintiff contended it had used the mark PADAN continuously since 1988 and created original artistic packaging in 2006.
Procedural background: The defendants filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on grounds that the plaintiff lacked locus standi and had no cause of action. After hearing arguments and considering written submissions, the court reserved judgment.
Dispute: Whether the plaintiff had the locus standi and a valid cause of action to sue the defendants for infringement and passing off concerning the mark PADAN and related packaging, despite not being the licensee, proprietor, or actual user.
Discussion: The court analysed documents and pleadings to establish that the plaintiff was neither the registered proprietor nor licensee of the mark PADAN. The actual license and use belonged to Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd. (CAPL), a separate legal entity undergoing insolvency. The court further observed that any goodwill or sales figures submitted related to CAPL, not the plaintiff, and that the packaging copyright was also assigned to CAPL, with no assignment to the plaintiff.
Decision: The court held that the plaint disclosed no cause of action, and the plaintiff lacked locus standi. The suit was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, and all pending applications were disposed of.
No comments:
Post a Comment