Dismissed

1.CASTROL Ltd., v. 1.MARVEL Petroleum

Madras HC29 Mar 2021CS/901/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a copyright and trademark infringement suit filed by Castrol Limited and its Indian subsidiary against various oil retailers. The court found the plaintiffs had received instructions not to pursue the relief sought and dismissed the suit, granting liberty to file a fresh suit on a fresh cause of action to protect their trademarks.

What did the court decide?

Suit dismissed; liberty granted to plaintiffs to file fresh suit on fresh cause of action.

1.CASTROL Ltd., Vs 1.MARVEL Petroleum — Intellectual Property | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29.03.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

C.S.No.901 of 2001
and O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001
1.Castrol Limited,
Burmah Castrol House
Pipers Way, Swindon
Wiltshire, SN3 1RE
United Kingdom
Rep. by its Constituted Attorney
Mr.Murlidar Balasubramanian
2.Castrol India Limited
781-785, Rayala Towers V Floor
Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002 rep. by its
Constituted Attorney
Mr.Murlidhar Balasubramanian ... Plaintiffs
..Vs..
1.Marvel Petroleum
represented by Prakash,
Natarajan and Pinky,
No.1, Thatha Muthiappan Street,
Broadway, Chennai 600 001.
2.RPM Oil Stores,
represented by R.Prathap Guptha
and S.Rajan Babu

¶7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 1/6

¶8

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶9

No.20, B.C.Press Road, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013.

¶10

3.Universal Agencies represented by Mazoodh and Suja Bet Alikhan

¶11

No.51, Waltax Road, Chennai 600 079.

¶12

4.Crescent Automobile represented by Mazoodh No.51, Walltax Road,

¶13

Chennai 600 079.

¶14

5.Suresh Petroleum

¶15

represented by Sudhakar No.38, Mannarsamy Koil Street,

¶16

Royapuram, Chennai 600 013.

¶17

6.Shyam Battery Service represented by Durairaj

¶18

No.129 (Old No.67), Choolai High Road,

¶19

Choolai, Chennai 600 112. ... Defendants

¶20

PRAYER : Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 CPC read with Order IV

¶21

Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the

¶22

Copyright Act, 1957 read with Sections 27, 28, 29, 105 and 106 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, prayed for a Judgment and Decree:-

¶23

(a) A perpetual order and injunction restraining the defendants by

¶24

themselves, their partners, heirs, legal representatives, successors-in-

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 2/6

¶26

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶27

business, assigns, servants, agents, distributors, stockists, representatives or any of them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's registered

¶28

Trademarks CASTROL, CASTROL GTX, CASTROL CRB and CASTROL LOGO by use of Trademarks identical or deceptively similar thereto.

¶29

(b) Granting a perpetual order and injunction restraining the

¶30

defendants by themselves, their partners, heirs, legal representatives, successors-in-business, assigns, servants, agents, distributors, stockists, representatives or any of them from in any manner passing off or enabling others to pass off the defendant's lubricants, oils and greases as and for the plaintiff's lubricants, oils and greases by use of the Trademarks CASTROL, CASTROL GTX, CASTROL CRB and CASTROL LOGO or any mark similar thereto or and by use of packing materials, cartons, labels, containers having colour scheme of green, white and red in a manner similar to

¶31

plaintiff's CASTROL packing materials, cartons, labels and containers or in

¶32

any other manner whatsoever.

¶33

¶34

themselves, their partners, heirs, legal representatives, successors-in-

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 3/6

¶36

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶37

business, assigns, servants, agents, distributors, stockists, representatives or

¶38

any of them from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the Artistic work CASTROL LOGO by reproduction of an identical logo or any logo which is a substantial reproduction of plaintiff's CASTROL LOGO and from infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the Artistic work CASTROL packaging with distinctive colour scheme, get-up and layout by copying the

¶39

same or by making a substantial reproduction thereof or in any other manner

¶40

whatsoever.

¶41

(d) The defendants be ordered to surrender to plaintiffs for

¶42

destruction all goods, containers, cartons, labels, prints, blocks, dyes, plates, moulds and other material bearing the plaintiff's registered Trademarks CASTROL, CASTROL GTX, CASTROL CRB and CASTROL LOGO or

¶43

any marks similar thereto.

¶44

(e) The defendants be directed to pay to the plaintiffs as damages a

¶45

sum of Rs.10,00,500/- in respect of acts of infringement of Trademark

¶46

infringement of copyright and passing off committed by the defendants.

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 4/6

¶48

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶49

(f) A preliminary decree be passed in favour of the plaintiffs directing the defendants to render account of profits made by use of Trademarks and Artistic Work of CASTROL, CASTROL GTX, CASTROL CRB and CASTROL LOGO and containers and cartons and labels which are

¶50

a slavish imitation of plaintiff's Trademark and Artistic Work and a final decree be passed in favour of the plaintiffs for the amount of profits thus to

¶51

have been made by the defendants after the latter have rendered accounts.

¶52

(g) For costs of the suit.
For Plaintiffs : Mr.Anupam Raguraman
For Defendants : D1, D3, D4 No Appearance
D2, D5 Unserved
*********
J U D G M E N T
Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs.

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 5/6

¶54

C.S.No.901 of 2001, O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶55

rna

¶56

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J

¶57

It is stated that instructions had been received that the plaintiffs

¶58

are not interested in pressing the relief sought in the suit. Suit is dismissed. However liberty is granted to the plaintiffs to file a fresh suit on a fresh cause of action either against the defendants or against anybody acting under the defendants or against any third party to protect their registered Trademarks 'Castrol, Castrol GTX, Castrol CRB and Castrol Logo'. 3. With the said observation, suit is dismissed. No order as to costs. Connected applications are closed. 29.03.2021 Index : Yes / No Web : Yes / No rna

¶59

C.S.No.901 of 2001 and O.A.Nos.911, 912 of 2001

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 6/6

1.CASTROL Ltd., v. 1.MARVEL Petroleum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

1.CASTROL Ltd., v. 1.MARVEL Petroleum

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

Mahendra T.Thakkar and another Vs N.Ranga Rao @ Sons Private Ltd. and another

E-Merge Tech Global Services (P) Ltd. Represented by its Authorised signatory Mr.R.Venkatesan, Vs M.R. Vidhyasagar

M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited Vs M/s.Aadhav Food Corporation

M/s.Raja Agencies Vs M/s.Yasin Impex India Pvt.Ltd.

Mr.R.Ayubkhan Vs M/s.Kalaignar Tv Pvt.Ltd. and another

V.Sundaresan and 4 others Vs Varalakshmi Starch Industries Pvt. Ltd. and another