Allowed

M/s Micro-Pak Ltd. v. Kwality Chemicals Company

Madras HC21 Mar 2018CS/779/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an intellectual property suit regarding trademark infringement, the commercial court recorded a Memorandum of Compromise entered into by the plaintiffs and defendant after hearings. The court issued a compromise decree incorporating the settlement terms, including the defendant's acknowledgment of the plaintiffs' well-known trademarks.

What did the court decide?

A decree was passed on the terms of the Memorandum of Compromise dated 02.03.2018. Connected applications were closed.

M/s Micro-Pak Ltd. Vs Kwality Chemicals Company — Madras HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated:21.03.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶6

C.S.No.779 of 2017 & O.A.Nos.996 to 998 of 2017 & A.Nos.6184 and 6185 of 2017 1.M/s.Micro-Pak Ltd., Suite 2504, 25/F, Tower 6 The Gateway, Harbour City 9, Canton Road, TsimShaTsul Kowloon, Hong Kong Represented by its Power of Attorney Holder Mr.SateeshJadhav

¶7

M/s.Gantonde Leathers and Accessories P Ltd., Corium House, Alsa Garden Complex, A Block, V Floor 58, Harrington Road Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031 Represented by its Managing Director Mr.SateeshJadhav ... Plaintiffs Vs Kwality Chemicals Company No.105, Kumaran Road RPP Complex Tiruppur- 641 601 Tamil Nadu, India ... Defendant

¶8

Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Sections 27, 134 and 135 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 read with Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 seeking perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors, stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person claiming under them from in any manner infringing the 1^st plaintiff's registered trademark “Micro-Pak” by manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, advertising, antimicrobial stickers, or any moisture management and mould prevention products or any other stickers or product or goods using the Trade mark

¶9

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶10

¶11

Micro-Pak or any other trade mark/s which is/are identical with or deceptively similar to the 1^st plaintiff's registered Trade Mark “Micro-Pak” or in any other manner whatsoever; perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors, stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person claiming under them from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, advertising, anti-microbial stickers, or any moisture management and mould prevention products or any other stickers or product or goods under the trademark “Micro-pak” or any other trademark/s which is/are identical with or deceptively similar to the 1^st plaintiff's Trade Marks, namely (i) Micro-Pak (word), (ii) Micro-Pak Green Label (filed as Plaint Document No.2) or (iii) Micro-Pak Trade Dress (filed as Plaint Document No.3) so as to pass off the Defendant's products as and for those of the first plaintiff's products or in any manner connected with the plaintiffs; perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, its distributors, stockists, servants, agents, retailers, representatives or any other person claiming under them from in any manner infringing the copyright of the first plaintiff by reproducing and/or using the plaintiff's said Artistic Works namely (i) Micro-Pak (word), (ii) Micro-Pak Green Sticker (filed as Plaint Document No.2) or (iii) Micro-Pak Trade Dress (filed as Plaint Document No.3) or any other artistic works which are a substantial reproduction of the 1^st plaintiff's said artistic works or in any other manner whatsoever; to direct the defendant to surrender to plaintiff for destruction of the defendant's Counterfeit products, packets, labels, dyes, blocks, moulds, screen prints, packing materials and other materials bearing the 1^st plaintiff's said trademarks/artistic works or any other trademark/artistic work which is/are deceptively similar to that of the 1^st plaintiff's; for a preliminary decree in favour of the 1^st plaintiff directing the defendant to render account of profits made by use of plaintiff's said Trademarks /Artistic works and the trade marks/artistic works and a final decree be passed in favour of the 1^st plaintiff for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by the Defendant after the latter have rendered accounts; to direct the defendant to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.25,01,000/- as damages for acts of passing off and infringement of copyright committed by the Defendant till date and for the costs of the suit.

¶12

For Plaintiff : Mr.Madhan Babu For Defendant : Mr.M.R.Srinath

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

Mr.Madhan Babu, learned counsel on record is before this Commercial Division on behalf of both the plaintiffs. To be noted, there

¶15

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶16

¶17

are two plaintiffs in this suit.

¶18

2.On behalf of the sole defendant Mr.S.R.Srinath, counsel on record for the sole defendant is before this Commercial Division.

¶19

3.With regard to the litigants, both plaintiffs are companies. While plaintiff No.1 is a Public Limited Company, Plaintiff No.2 is a Private Limited Company. Both the companies are represented by Mr.SateeshJadhav, Managing Director of Plaintiff No.2 company who s also Power of Attorney holder of Plaintiff No.1 company. To be noted, Mr.SateeshJadhav, in these capacities, has also verified and signed the plaint. With regard to the sole defendant, I am informed that the sole defendant Kwality Chemicals Company is a Proprietary concern and sole proprietrix Ms.Sudhapriya Sakthivel is before this Commercial Division. 4. Both the aforesaid learned counsel i.e, Mr.Madhan Babu and Mr.M.R.Srinath submit that the parties have arrived at a compromise and have entered into a memorandum of compromise. A memorandum of compromise dated 02.03.2018 duly signed by both the plaintiffs and the sole defendant as well as their respective counsel has been placed before me. This memorandum of compromise dated 02.03.2018 shall henceforth be referred to as 'said MOC' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity.

¶20

The said MOC has been entered into by the parties after substantial hearing on merits in the matter. In other words, this matter

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

¶23

was heard for some time before the parties arrived at a settlement and reduced the terms to said MOC. With regard to Clause 2 of said MOC, the same reads as follows:

¶24

“2.The Defendant acknowledges that the mark “MICROPAK”, the Micropak Green Label and the Micropak Trade dress filed as Plaint Document Nos.2 and 3 and annexed hereto as Annexure -A and B are well known trademarks of the plaintiff as defined under Section 2(zg) of the Trademarks Act, 1999.”

¶25

Before I record the Memorandum of Compromise, I make it clear

¶26

that this clause touches upon a right in rem qua the plaintiffs and therefore, it is made clear that this being an action in personem, this clause will be enforceable only against the sole defendant herein.

¶27

With the above clarification, on the basis of the joint request

¶28

made by both the learned counsel, on instructions, from their respective clients, I deem it appropriate to pass a decree in terms of said MOC. Said MOC reads as follows:

¶29

1.The terms Plaintiffs and Defendant shall mean and include the heirs, legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns as applicable of each party.

¶30

2.The Defendant acknowledges that the mark “MICRO

¶31

PAK”, the Micropak Green Label and the Micropak Trade dress filed as Plaint Document Nos.2 and 3 and annexed hereto as Annexure -A and B are well known trademarks of the plaintiff as defined under Section 2(zg) of the Trademarks Act, 1999.

¶32

3.The Defendant hereby undertakes and agrees to not sell the infringing/counterfeit Micropak Sticker Rolls, anywhere in the

¶33

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶34

¶35

world, including India, in any manner whatsoever including through its website www.kwalitychemicals.in or under any other domain name.

¶36

4.The Defendant solemnly affirms and states though it had offer for sale the infringing/counterfeit Micropak Sticker Rolls on its website, it has actually not sold any of the said product till date and also does not have stock of the same.

¶37

5.The Defendant hereby that infringed goods were offered to the defendant for sale by one person from Belgaum namely Akshay Incorporation, at D-70, Angol Industrial Estate, Udyambag, Belgaum but the defendant has not received any consignment of infringed goods from the said person.

¶38

6.The defendant submits to a decree as prayed for by the plaintiff in Paragraph 34(A) to (C) of the plaint filed in C.S.No.779 of 2017.

¶39

8. In view of the above, the plaintiffs give up their relief as prayed for in Paragraph 34(D) to (E) of the plaint filed in C.S.No.779 of 2017.

¶40

10.The suit may be decreed in terms of the above.

¶41

11.Each party shall bear their own cost.

¶42

12.The suit shall be decreed on the basis of the present

¶43

joint Memorandum of Compromise and the Joint Memorandum of Compromise shall form part of the decree.”

¶44

There shall be a decree in terms of said MOC. Said MOC shall form part of the compromise decree along with self-attested photocopies of the Identity Cards of the aforesaid representative of the plaintiffs and defendant.

¶45

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶46

¶47

Suit decreed on above terms. Consequently, all connected

¶48

interlocutory applications are closed.

¶49

21.03.2018
gpa

¶50

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.SUNDAR.J.,

gpa

C.S.No.779 of 2017 &
O.A.Nos.999, 1000 and 1001 of 2017 &
A.No.6193 of 2017

¶55

21.03.2018

¶56

http://www.judis.nic.in

M/s Micro-Pak Ltd. v. Kwality Chemicals Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Micro-Pak Ltd. v. Kwality Chemicals Company

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

M/s.S.N.R.Dhall mill Vs M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinrey P.Ltd

V.Rangasamy Naidu Educational Vs Cambridge Institute of

Avm Film Studios Vs K.S.Sabarinathan and 3 others

M/s.Micro-Pak Ltd. Vs Pranam Ji Creations

M/s Kaleesuwari Refinery Vs M/s Sri Karthikeya Traders

Mrs.Banni Bai Vs Mr.D.Balaraman