9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 1009X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mislead the public especially the existing and prospective students and their parents. 2. The Plaintiff is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at 721, Suneja Tower-II, Dist. Centre, Janak Puri, New Delhi-110058. The suit has been filed by Mr. Arun Kumar, Manager (Operations) of the Plaintiff company who is authorized to sign and institute the present suit on behalf of the Plaintiff company by board resolution passed in his favour on 26th May, 2005 which is exhibited as Ex. PW-1/1. 3. The Plaintiff provides training in aviation, hospitality and travel industry. It is running a chain of institutes under the name and style of "Frankfinn Institute of Airhostess Training" and has 43 centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Hindustan Times (Delhi Edition) dated 3rd August, 2005 are reproduced hereunder: ANY IN-FINE-SHIN INSTITUTE In-Flight and Airport exposure They provide training in a stationed aircraft, which is useless, as for cabin crew to have real hands-on training, the plane must take off. Brand Ambassador They have to resort to using celebrities, as they have no real successes to speak of. Placements You will not disagree that the only criteria to choose any educational institute is its placement percentage and not numbers. All tall claims are hollow unless supported by placement percentages (Eg. : If 70 students are placed, the question arises, out of how many students - 6000 or 7000?) 7. The Plaintiff stated that no other institute in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uit CS (OS) No. 1127/2003 which was filed by the Defendant against the NGO set up by the Plaintiff SAUVEUR for restraining it from taking out and publishing any defamatory statements against the Defendant's institute AHA. 10. The Defendant submits that in both the abovesaid suits, the Plaintiff was restrained from taking out and publishing any defamatory advertisement in the newspapers using the name of the firm of the Defendant. 11. The Defendant further submits that its institute Air Hostess Academy (in short 'AHA') is a reputed institute and a pioneer in the field of imparting training to students/personnel in the field of Aviation and Hospitality Industry. It is the first and only Academy of its kind in the Aviation and Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were its Brand Ambassador. The Defendant contended that by the impugned advertisement it has only compared the basis of its services with those of the other institutes which make tall and false claims in their advertisements. 17. The Plaintiff in its replication denied that the NGO SAUVEUR has been set up by the Plaintiff or has any connection with it. It is submitted that by orders dated 4th May, 2004 and 24th May, 2004 in CS (OS) No. 464/2004, no restraint orders were passed against the Plaintiff. In fact, the Plaintiff was granted leave to publish its advertisement as per specimen shown and approved by this Court. 18. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the court on 24th March, 2006: 1. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 23. There are various decisions of this Court wherein the test of comparative advertisement on the law of disparagement has been discussed and proved holding that a promoter of a product is not entitled to defame the goods of another manufacturer in the garb of comparative advertising. It was held in Reckit and Colman of India Ltd. v. Kiwi T.T.K. Ltd.1996 (16) PTC 393 (Del) that: (I) A tradesman is entitled to declare his goods to be best in the world, even though the declaration is untrue. (II) He can also say that my goods are better than his competitors goods even though such statement is untrue. (III) For the purpose of saying that his goods are the best in the world or his goods are better than his competitors' he can even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iff trains the student in stationed aircraft and has also leased a real Airbus A-300 for the said purpose, therefore, the Defendant by using the words useless' for providing training in stationed aircraft has clearly defamed the Plaintiff's services. 26. Similarly, the Defendant has used the words 'no real successes' while comparing the training provided by other competitor's and referring to brand ambassadors endorsed by them. This also defames Plaintiff as the institute of the Plaintiff is endorsed by Ms. Soha Ali Khan who is its brand ambassador and a well known celebrity. Although, the Defendant has not mentioned the name of the Plaintiff directly, however, the way the said advertisement is given, makes it clear tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
