Bombay High Court: Restraining the defendant company from using the word ‘marine’ in its products, a bench comprising of Hon’ble SJ Kathawalla J, allowed the interim petition of the plaintiff seeking relief from the defendants for infringing the trademarks and copyrights of the plaintiff and committing the act of passing off its goods as that of the plaintiff. The Court ruled that prima facie it was satisfied that the adoption of the word ‘Marine” by the defendants was neither honest nor bona fide. The plaintiff company contended that by using the mark Jivanjor Marine Plus, the respondents were infringing on the registered mark of the plaintiff, besides being guilty of false representation. The Court was satisfied that the mark Marine by itself had gained reputation, goodwill, further distinctiveness and a secondary meaning which was associated with the consumers, traders and public at large of the plaintiff alone. The Court observed that when a customer goes to a shop to buy biscuits he simply asks for them by their product identification mark/brand or sub-brand like Marie or Monaco or Good Day or Krackjack or 50:50 or Maska Chaska and does not preface it with the name of the manufacturer like Parle or Britannia. As a result a person who wanted the Marine adhesive would ask for Marine and not Fevicol Marine as there was no other Marine branded product in the market for him to need the addition of the prefix Fevicol to distinguish one Marine from the other. [Pidilite Industries Ltd vs Jubilant Agri & Consumer Products Limited, NMSL 1713 of 2013, decided on January 13, 2014]
Posted on: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 04:33:49 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015