Case title:
Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd Vs M/S Parle Biscuits Pvt Ltd
Date of Order:
19th July 2024
Bench:
(Single Judge Bench ) Justice Krishna Rao
Parties: Petitioner:- SAJ FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD
Respondent:- M/S PARLE BISCUITS PVT LTD
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS:-
THE TRADEMARK ACT, 1999
Section 135:-
Provides for reliefs to the plaintiff for passing off or injunction of the trademark used which includes ex-parte order and Interlocutory order intending to preserve documents, infringed goods, evidence, accounts of profits,
Section 29:-
Covers the infringement of registered trademarks.
Section 27:-
Covers the common law rights of the legitimate trademark holders for passing off the goods and services.
OVERVIEW
The food manufacturing company filed the application for an interim injunction called “BRISK FARM” which is involved in the production of biscuits, bakery and other edibles by commercially using the word “TOP STAR” and various combinations. The defendant seeks to register and commercialise under the name of “TOP GOLD STAR”. The Plaintiff, therefore, seeks interim injunction as the defendant's product may lead to deceiving the consumers and obvious confusion in the market. The court, on observing the creativity using the fonts placed on the packaging in such a way to create deceptively similar products for which an injunction order is issued.
ISSUES RAISED
Whether the plaintiff is eligible to obtain an Interim Injunction against the respondent’s product “TOP GOLD STAR”.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER
- The petitioner stated that they commenced their business in the year 2000, extensively and continuously using “TOP GOLD” in the year 2005 by arranging it in a unique combination.
- It is registered under class 30 and continues to hold validity. it has been involved in commercial activities including marketing, distributing, and selling under the house mark of “BISK FARM” with various combinations including “Top”, “Top Gold”, and “Gold Finger” among others.
- The plaintiff had also invested heavily in various marketing sectors incurring Rs. 1140.19 Lakh Rupees as of February 2024.
- It was maintained that the usage of the word “TOP GOLDSTAR” was deliberately used by the defendant minimizing the word “Star” on the packaging which depicted their malicious intent of creating confusion and leading to unfair trade practices.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT:-
The party and the counsellors representing the respondent remained absent during the proceedings leading to an ex-parte order from the court.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
The Hon’ble Court agreed to pass the injunction order against the Defendant on the following basis.
- The case is a prima facie case
- The balance of convenience and inconvenience is in the favour of the plaintiff
- The failure to obtain this injunction order may lead to irreparable damage to the plaintiff and its interest.
The mark “TOP STAR GOLD” Is indeed identical to the mark “TOP STAR” owned by the Plaintiff for which the defendants and allied agents were restrained from using and commercialising the mark in any manner. Although they can use the words “TOP” or “STAR” separately while conjunction it with other words.
CONCLUSION
The Trademark laws not only serve to protect the interest of commercial entities but also protect the interest of consumers, who often rely on the packaging of the words of the products for consumption. In the above case, the combination of “TOP STAR GOLD” by the defendant was used with a clear intention to deceive the consumer with identical name and packaging tactics. The injunction order passed by the Hon’ble High Court recognised the interest of the consumers and the plaintiff's interest.
