Allowed

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. M Chillies Agro Allied Chemicals and Another

Bombay HC12 Jan 2023IA/2378/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This adjudication converts ad-interim reliefs granted to the Plaintiff into absolute reliefs in a commercial IP suit, dismissing the Defendant's request for non-appearance while noting the Plaintiff's prima facie case for continued relief.

What did the court decide?

The ad-interim reliefs granted earlier are made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c).

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs M Chillies Agro Allied… — Intellectual Property | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

906.IA.2378.2021.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS SHRINIVAS MALANI MALANI Date: 2023.01.16 13:47:09 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2378 OF 2021

¶5

¶6

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 284 OF 2021

¶7

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Versus

¶8

...Applicant/Plaintiff

¶9

M Chillies Agro Allied Chemicals & Anr. ...Defendants

¶10

¶11

Mr. Vinod Bhagat and Mr. Karan Khiani i/by G.S. Hegde and V.A. Bhagat, for Applicant/Plaintiff

¶12

Mr. Vidul Shah i/by Mr. Sushant Prabhune, for Defendant No. 2.

¶13

Ms. Rucha Ambekar, Section Officer, Court Receiver Office, is present.

¶14

¶15

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J DATE : 12^th JANUARY, 2023.

¶16

P. C. :

¶17

In this application, by order dated 03^rd February, 2021,

¶18

this Court granted ex-parte ad-interim reliefs in favour of the Plaintiff. The order was executed and the Court Receiver submitted his report. Thereafter, by order dated 13^th January, 2022, the Leave Petition was allowed. By order dated 22^nd February, 2022, the adinterim reliefs were continued.

¶19

The Defendants were served and on 28^th September, 2022, this Court granted further ad-interim relief pertaining to the action of passing off. In the said order, this Court recorded the fact that the Defendant No. 2, being the Marketer, had appeared through Advocate and it was claimed on behalf of Defendant No. 2 that its name had been wrongly shown on the impugned product, as a result of which,

Page1 of 3

Shrikant

906.IA.2378.2021.doc

the Defendant No. 2 had taken appropriate steps for filing police complaint against the Defendant No. 1 at Kolkata. By the said order, the ad-interim reliefs were continued.

¶24

On 15^th November, 2022, this Court continued operation of the ad-interim reliefs until further orders and directed listing of the application today, as a matter of last chance to Defendant No. 1 to appear before this Court. As noted above, the Defendant No. 2 has already appeared through Advocate.

¶25

Today when the application is called out for hearing, the learned Counsel for the Applicant/Plaintiff has reiterated the contentions raised on earlier occasions and it is submitted that the ad-interim reliefs granted by this Court may be made absolute. The learned Counsel for the Defendant No. 2 submits that since the said Defendant has already taken appropriate steps against the Defendant No. 1, the name of the Defendant No. 2 may be deleted from the array of Defendants.

¶26

Insofar as the prayer for deletion of Defendant No. 2 is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that an appropriate application may be filed in that regard.

¶27

As regards the contentions raised on behalf of the Plaintiff, this Court has perused the earlier orders passed by this

Page2 of 3

Shrikant

906.IA.2378.2021.doc

Court, particularly orders dated 03^rd February, 2021 and 28^th September, 2022. It is found that this Court came to conclusion, on the basis of material available on record, that a strong prima facie is indeed made out by the Plaintiff for grant of ad-interim reliefs. The Defendant No. 2 appeared through Advocate and has not opposed the interim prayers made on behalf of the Plaintiff, particularly for the reason that according to the said Defendant, its name was wrongly mentioned on the impugned product by the Defendant No. 1.

¶32

As noted above, the Defendant No. 1 has refused to appear before this Court to oppose the present application.

¶33

This Court has again considered the material on record and it is found that a strong prima facie case is indeed made out by the Plaintiff in its faovur for grant of interim reliefs. It is found that unless the ad-interim reliefs granted earlier are continued and made absolute, the Plaintiff is likely to suffer grave and irreparable loss, thereby indicating that the balance of convenience clearly in favour of the Plaintiff.

¶34

In view of the above, the ad-interim reliefs granted earlier are made absolute.

¶35

The application is disposed of and allowed in terms of the prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c).

¶36

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶37

Page3 of 3

¶38

Shrikant

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. M Chillies Agro Allied Chemicals and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. M Chillies Agro Allied Chemicals and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jupiter Life Line Hospitals Limited Vs Jupiter Multispeciality Hospital

Mrs. Rakhi Rajesh Bang Vs Mr. Rajendra Ramvilas Jakhotia Prop. M/S.Sitarm Developers and Others

Invent Assets Securitisation Reconstruction Pvt.Ltd. - Applicant vs Official Liquidator of Mafatlal Engineering Industries Ltd.

Hindustan Unilever Limited Vs Rakesh Gupta

Iref Knowledge Services Private Limited Vs Symbiosis Institute of Management Studies Thr. Directors

Dilip Bhavanji Shah Vs Errol Moraes