Dismissed

Svs Oil Mills v. Svs Super Market

Madras HC9 Mar 2018CS/111/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a civil suit for trademark infringement by decreeing a compromise based on a Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018, where defendants agreed to relinquish rights to the trademark SVS and surrender infringing materials.

What did the court decide?

Compromise decree passed in terms of the Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018 including permanent injunctions and surrender of infringing materials.

Svs Oil Mills Vs Svs Super Market — Intellectual Property | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated: 09.03.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶6

C.S.No.111 of 2018
and O.A.Nos.150 and 151 of 2018
S.V.S.Oil Mills
Rep. by its Partner
S.V.Chandrapandian
No.11m Thiruvottiyur High Road
Chennai – 600 019. .. Plaintiff
Vs.
1.SVS Super Market
No.255/76, Thiruvottiyur High Road,
New Washermenpet,
Chennai – 600 081.
2.Mr.Ganesharam
Sri Lakshmi Traders,
No.255/76, Thiruvottiyur High Road,
New Washermenpet,
Chennai – 600 081.
3.SVS Rice & Provisions
No.255/76, Thiruvottiyur High Road,
New Washermenpet,
Chennai – 600 081. .. Defendants

¶7

This Civil Suit is preferred, under Order VII Rule 1 C.P.C. Read with Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules and Sections 27 (2), 29, 134 and 135 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 praying to

¶8

a) grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, by themselves, their servants, agents, distributors, or any one claiming through them from manufacturing, selling, advertising and offering for sale using the http://www.judis.nic.in Trade Mark SVS or any other similar Trade Mark name or similar sounding expression in any media and use the same in name board, invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or by using any other trade mark/name which is in any way visually or deceptively or phonetically similar to the plaintiff's registered

¶9

¶10

Trade Mark SVS/S.V.S.OIL MILLS and use the same in pouches, packets or use the mark in invoices, letters heads and visiting cards and use the same as part of their Super Market name or with respect to edible oils or vanaspathi or sunflower oil or rice & provisions or any other trade literature by using any other trade mark which is in any way visually, or phonetically similar to the plaintiff's registered Trade Mark Nos.1000939, 1000940, 1035469, 1261119, 976936 and 976935 or in any manner infringing the plaintiff's registered Trade Marks referred herein.

¶11

b) grant a permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, by themselves, their servants, agents, distributors, or any one claiming through them from reproducing by selling, advertising and or offering for sale using the Trade Mark SVS or in relation Super Market name or with respect to edible oils or vanaspathi or sunflower oil or rice & provisions and use the same in pouches, bottles, packets or use the mark in invoices, letters heads and visiting cards or any other trade literature or by using any other trade mark which is in any way substantially reproduce the plaintiff's Trademark SVS or which is in any manner deceptively or phonetically confusingly similar to the plaintiff's Trade Mark or in any manner passing off of the plaintiff's Trademark SVS;

¶12

c) direct the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff all the packing material, cartons, advertisement materials and hoardings, letter-heads, visiting cards, office stationery and all other materials containing/bearing the Trade Mark SVS or other identical trade mark used in the pouches and packets bearing the word SVS:

¶13

d) direct the defendants to render an account of profits made by them by the use of the impugned trademark SVS on the goods/service referred and decree the suit for the profits found to have been made by the defendants, after the Defendants have rendered accounts and

¶14

e) direct the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the costs to the suit.

¶15

For Plaintiff : Ms.Gladys Daniel For Defendants : Mr.B.Dhiyaneswaran

¶16

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

On behalf of sole plaintiff Ms.Gladys Daniel, counsel on record is before

¶20

this Commercial Division. On behalf of all the three defendants, Mr.B.Dhiyaneswaran, counsel on record is before this Commercial Division.

¶21

Plaintiff is a Partnership Firm. It consists of seven partners. Two out

¶22

of the seven partners i.e., Thiru V.C.Thiyagarajan and Thiru V.R.Jayakumaran

¶23

are before this Commercial Division. To be noted, they have been duly authorized by the other five partners of the Partnership Firm to be present, before this Commercial Division today.

¶24

On behalf of defendants, Mr.B.Dhiyaneswaran, counsel on record has

¶25

filed a memo dated 09.03.2018. It unfurls from the memo that defendant No.1

¶26

SVS Super Market is a Proprietary Concern and that the Proprietor is

¶27

Mr.Ganeshram, who is defendant No.2 in this suit. The fact that Mr.Ganeshram, is unable to be present before this Commercial Division today

¶28

owing to some personal inconvenience has been brought to my notice by learned counsel for defendants in his oral submission. It also unfurls from the aforesaid memo dated 09.03.2018 filed by defendants that defendant No.3

¶29

before me i.e., SVS Rice & Provisions is also a Proprietary concern and

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶31

Mr.Gansehram, defendant No.2 before me is the sole Proprietor.

¶32

A joint submission is made by both learned counsel that a

¶33

¶34

Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018, has been entered into between

¶35

the parties. The Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018, duly singed by plaintiff, three defendants and their respective counsel, has been placed before me. The Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018, reads as

¶36

follows:

¶37

“1.That the terms Plaintiff and Defendants shall mean and include their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assignees of each party.

¶38

2.That the Plaintiff is the Proprietor of the Trademark SVS having secured the mark under an Award dt. 09.07.1984 which has been decreed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras and upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

¶39

3.That the Defendants Partners/Proprietors were also party to the Arbitration which led to the Award dt. 09.07.1984.

¶40

4.That the Defendants acknowledge the Award dt. 09.07.1984 and relinquish every right, title and interest in the Trademark SVS.

¶41

5.That the Defendants submit to a Judgment and Decree as prayed for in terms of prayer (a) & (b) of para 27 of the plaint for

¶42

(a) granting a permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, by themselves, their servants, agents, distributors, or anyone claiming through them from manufacturing, selling, advertising and offering for sale using the Trade Mark SVS or any other similar Trade Mark name or similar sounding expression in any media and use the same in name board, invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or by using any other trade mark/name which is in any way visually or deceptively or phonetically similar to the plaintiff's registered Trade Mark SVS/S.V.S.OIL MILLS and use the same in pouches, packets or use the mark in invoices, letters heads and visiting cards and use the same as

¶43

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶44

¶45

part of their Super Market name or with respect to edible oils or vanaspathi or sunflower oil or rice & provisions or any other trade literature by using any other trade mark which is in any way visually, or phonetically similar to the plaintiff's registered Trade Mark Nos.1000939, 1000940, 1035469, 1261119, 976936 and 976935 or in any manner infringing the plaintiff's registered Trade Marks referred herein.

¶46

(b) granting a permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, by themselves, their servants, agents, distributors, or anyone claiming through them from reproducing by selling, advertising and or offering for sale using the Trade Mark SVS or in relation Super Market name or with respect to edible oils or vanaspathi or sunflower oil or rice & provisions and use the same in pouches, bottles, packets or use the mark in invoices, letters heads and visiting cards or any other trade literature or by using any other trade mark which is in any way substantially reproduce the plaintiff's Trademark SVS or which is in any manner deceptively or phonetically confusingly similar to the Plaintiff's Trade Mark or in any manner passing off of the Plaintiff's

¶47

Trademark SVS ;

¶48

6. That the defendants shall not use or file any Trademark Application for registration of the Trade Mark SVS and also undertake hereby not to assert any right in respect of the expression SVS and SVS Formative Marks by filing Trademark Applications or using the same or similar sounding expression for any goods or services in future. The Defendant also undertakes to withdraw any Application in respect of SVS and SVS Formative Marks or any other similar sounding marks that is not within the knowledge of the Plaintiff.

¶49

In view of the decree for permanent injunction the Plaintiffs have given up the reliefs contained in prayers c, d & e in para 27 of the suit including cost of the suit.”

¶50

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶51

¶52

A joint request is made before me that a compromise decree in terms

¶53

of the aforesaid Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018, may please be

¶54

passed in the main suit.

¶55

The request is acceded to.
7. There shall be a compromise decree in this suit i.e., C.S.No.111 of
2018 in terms of the aforesaid Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018.
8. The aforesaid Memorandum of Compromise dated 07.03.2018 shall
form part of the decree in this suit.
9. Suit is decreed on the above terms. Consequently, connected pending
applications shall stand closed.
09.03.2018
Speaking/Non-Speaking order
Index : Yes/No
vsm
Note: Issue decree by 23.03.2018.

¶56

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.SUNDAR, J.

vsm

C.S.No.111 of 2018
and O.A.Nos.150 and 151 of 2018

¶61

09.03.2018

¶62

http://www.judis.nic.in

Svs Oil Mills v. Svs Super Market

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Svs Oil Mills v. Svs Super Market

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

S.P.Prabhu Vs Thiru.K.Venkadesan

R.Srinath Vs Thiru.Thiyagarajan

M.Ponnuswamy Vs Latha Match Industies

Lifestyle Equities Cv Vs Qd Seatoman Designs Pvt.Ltd

S.v.Balasubramani Vs M/s.Sri Veeras

M/s.Apex Laboratories Pvt.Ltd. Vs Syskem Pharmocrats