Allowed

M/S Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar (Exports) Ltd. v. Mr Bhupinder Jainaa and Anr.

Delhi HC10 Dec 2024C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR)/754/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought cancellation of copyright registration held by respondent 1 alleging fraudulent and dishonest adoption of identical artistic artwork for rice products under Indian Copyright Act, 1957.

What did the court decide?

Copyright registration under A-74496/2005 cancelled and Registrar of Copyright directed to carry out requisite rectification.

M/S Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar (Exports) Ltd. Vs Mr… — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~43

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 754/2022

¶4

M/S AMIR CHAND JAGDISH KUMAR (EXPORTS)

¶5

LTD .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Sudarshan Bansal with Mr. Arpit Dudeja, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

MR BHUPINDER JAINAA AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. NK Manchanda, Advocate for respondent no. 1.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶10

O R D E R % 10.12.2024

¶11

The present petition has been filed under Section 50 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, for cancellation/rectification of the registered copyright under A-74496/2005, in favour of respondent no. 1.

¶12

The case, as canvassed on behalf of the petitioner in the petition, is as follows:-

¶13

2.1 Petitioner’s company is engaged in the business of processing, marketing and selling of rice. Further, the petitioner has also expanded its business and is exporting all kinds of rice to various countries.

¶14

2.2 In the year 1982, the petitioner honestly and bonafidely adopted its trade mark AEROPLANE along with Device of Aeroplane with distinctive art work, get-up and make-up. The petitioner is the proprietor of the said

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 754/2022

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 12:32:56

¶19

trade mark AEROPLANE LABEL in relation to said goods.

¶20

2.3 The art work in AEROPLANE BRAND LABEL is a unique and very distinctive get-up, make-up, composition, illustration and as such having distinctive features. It being new and original in character, the petitioner enjoys Copyright in the said art work under Indian Copyright Act, 1957.

¶21

2.4 The details of the copyright registrations in favour of the petitioner are as follows:-

¶22

2.5 In the year 1982, petitioners adopted, created and invented series of various AEROPLANE LABEL having distinctive artistic features therein. All the said artistic features are original in character and the petitioner claims to be owner thereof.

¶23

2.6. The respondent no. 1 is also engaged in the business of processing and marketing of rice. The respondent dishonestly and fraudulently adopted the artistic work FLYKING LABEL WITH DEVICE OF AEROPLANE in relation to their products.

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 754/2022

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 12:32:56

¶28

2.7 The respondent no. 1 with the ulterior motive and malafide intention adopted the alleged trade mark/art work FLYKING LABEL WITH DEVICE OF AEROPLANE in relation to rice.

¶29

2.8 The impugned artwork i.e. the DEVICE OF AEROPLANE is identical and exact copy to the petitioner’s art work in AEROPLANE BRAND LABEL art work in each and every aspect, including, get-up, make-up and artistic manner etc.

¶30

2.9 Thus, the present petition has been filed.

¶31

Today, Mr. NK Manchanda, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1, submits that the respondent no. 1 has already stopped user of the DEVICE OF AEROPLANE since the year 2010, when injunction order was passed against the respondent no. 1 in proceedings pending between the parties in District Court, Saket.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 further submits that on account of the respondent no. 1 having stopped the user of the DEVICE OF AEROPLANE, he has no objection, if the present petition is allowed.

¶33

The aforesaid statement is taken on record.

¶34

Accordingly, it is directed that copyright registration in favour of respondent no. 1 under registration no. A-74496/2005, in favour of respondent no. 1, is hereby cancelled.

¶35

The Registrar of Copyright is directed to carry out the requisite rectification in its Register.

¶36

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

¶37

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶38

DECEMBER 10, 2024/c

¶39

Page 3 of 3

¶40

C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 754/2022

¶41

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/12/2024 at 12:32:56

M/S Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar (Exports) Ltd. v. Mr Bhupinder Jainaa and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Amir Chand Jagdish Kumar (Exports) Ltd. v. Mr Bhupinder Jainaa and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dabur India Limited Vs Dhathri Ayurveda Private Limited

M/S Star Syringe Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S Tiger Surgical Disposable Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Allied Blenders and Distillers Limited Vs Frost Falcon Distilleries Limited

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. Vs Interio International P Ltd. & Ors.

M/S D.K Steel Vs Registrar of Copyrights

E.I Du Pont De Nemours and Company Vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs