9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Proprietorship of the registered trade marks. 2. Infringement of the plaintiff's trade marks. 3. Passing off goods by the defendant as those of the plaintiff. 4. Reliefs entitled to the plaintiff. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Proprietorship of the Registered Trade Marks: The court confirmed that the appellant (plaintiff) was the proprietor of the registered trade marks 12052 and 11426. This was based on certificates (Exhibits P.1 and P.2) issued under the Trade Marks Act, 1940, which showed that the trade marks were originally registered in the name of Janki Dass & Co. and later assigned to the appellant (plaintiff) on 12th July, 1955. This finding was not contested by the respondent. 2. Infringement of the Plaintiff's Trade Marks: The court examined whether the use of "ROYAL STAR" by the respondent constituted an infringement of the appellant's registered trade mark "EASTERN STAR." It was noted that both marks ended in the same sound, "STAR," which could cause confusion among purchasers of average intelligence and imperfect memory. The court held that the names "EASTERN STAR" and "ROYAL STAR" had an overall structural and phonetic similarity, likely to cause deception or confusion within the meaning of section 29 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Additionally, the court considered the evidence that the appellant's cycles were popularly referred to as "STAR" cycles. Witnesses from various places testified that customers referred to "EASTERN STAR" cycles as "STAR" cycles. The court preferred the statements of these witnesses over those of the respondent's witnesses, who claimed otherwise. The court concluded that the use of "ROYAL STAR" by the respondent was very likely to deceive or confuse purchasers, constituting an infringement of the appellant's registered trade mark No. 11426. 3. Passing Off Goods by the Defendant as Those of the Plaintiff: Given the finding of infringement, the court did not find it necessary to delve deeply into the issue of passing off. However, it was noted that the appellant's cycles had acquired a reputation and were known as "STAR CYCLES," further supporting the likelihood of confusion caused by the respondent's use of "ROYAL STAR." 4. Reliefs Entitled to the Plaintiff: The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the respondent from using the mark "ROYAL STAR" in relation to its cycles or cycle accessories. The respondent was also restrained from proceeding with its application No. 177777 in the Trade Marks Registry at Bombay. The appellant was awarded costs throughout from the respondent. Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, and the decree of the learned District Judge was set aside. The court decreed the suit by granting a permanent injunction against the respondent from using the mark "ROYAL STAR" and from proceeding with its trade mark application. The appellant was awarded costs.
|
