This is a civil suit filed for permanent injunction, destruction of infringing goods, and accounting of profits in a design infringement dispute. The plaintiff's counsel submitted instructions to withdraw the suit, which the court accepted.
Suit dismissed as withdrawn by the plaintiff; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)
TUESDAY, THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2021
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S. No. 6 of 2011
MOHAN BREWERIES & DISTILLERIES LTD. No.158, Rayala Towers, II Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002 Represented by its Chief Financial Officer & Company Secretary Mr. T. Krishnamurthy
... Plaintiff
Vs
Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a
judgment and decree:
a) Granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants by
themselves, their servants or agents or anyone claiming through them from https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
in any manner infringing the plaintiff's registered and well established
2
bottle design referred as M.O.No.1 either by using the offending identical
bottle design referred as M.O.No.2 or in any manner advertising the same.
b) Directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff the entire
stock of unused offending identicall bottle design along with the blocks and dyes for destruction;
c) Directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of
the profits earned by the defendants through the sale of beer by using the offending bottle design and directing payment of such profits to the plaintiff for the infringement committed by the defendants;
d) Directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the costs of suit.
This Civil Suit coming on this day before this Court for hearing in the presence of Mr.S.Diwakar for Mr.Rajesh Ramanathan, Advocate for the Plaintiff herein and Ms.N.Mrinalini for Mr.Ananth Padmanabhan, Advocate for the Defendants herein and upon reading the plaint filed herein
and the learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff would submit that he
has got instructions to withdraw the suit. A memo to that effect has also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ been filed and this Court doth recording the memo and it is ordered as
3
follows:-
(i) That the suit in C.S. No.6 of 2011 be and is hereby dismissed as
withdrawn.
(ii) That there shall be no costs of this suit.
WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2021.
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(Comm.Cases) //Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2022.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
4
ARS
26.11.2021
C.S. No. 6 of 2011
ORDER
DATED : 24.08.2021
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
FOR APPROVAL: 26.11.2021
APPROVED ON : 01.12.2021
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.6 of 2011
Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Ltd., No.158, Rayala Towers, II Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. Represented by its Chief Financial Officer & Company Secretary, Mr.T.Krishnamurthy
...Plaintiff
Vs.
2.M/s.Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporated Ltd.,
1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ...Defendants
Prayer: Plaint filed under Order VII, Rule 1 of C.P.C., r/w. Order IV Rule 1 of the High Court original side rules r/w. Sections 22 of the Designs Act, 2000, praying as follows:-
a) granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their servants or agents or anyone claiming through them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's registered and well established bottle https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
design referred as M.O.No.1 either by using the offending identical bottle
6
design referred as M.O.No.2 or in any manner advertising the same.
b) directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff the entire stock of unused offending identical bottle design along with the blocks and dyes for destruction;
c) directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of the profits earned by the defendants through the sale of beer by using the offending bottle design and directing payment of such profits to the plaintiff for the infringement committed by the defendants;
d) directing the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.S.Diwakar for Mr.Rajesh Ramanathan For Defendants : Ms.N.Mrinalini for Mr.Ananth Padmanabhan
J U D G M E N T
Mr.S.Diwakar, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff would
submit that he has got instructions to withdraw the suit. A memo to that effect has also been filed.
2.In view of the above, this suit is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
Sd/- R.S.M.J. 24.08.2021
List of witness and documents filed on the side of the plaintiff:
Nil
7
List of witness and documents filed on the side of the defendants:
Nil
Sd/- R.S.M.J. 24.08.2021 //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2022.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to entertain a suit for permanent injunction and destruction of infringing designs when the plaintiff has requested withdrawal.
How to dispose of a civil suit when the lead counsel submits that the plaintiff has instructions to withdraw the suit.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
R. Subramanian
Sanjib Banerjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
