(2 )ARBLR498 (SC ), 2000 (91 )ECR1 (SC ), 2000 GLH(3 )327 , (2000 )3 GLR2548 , 2000 INSC 312 , JT2000 (7 )SC 151 , 2000 (20 )PTC297 (SC ), 2000 (3 )RCR(Civil)203 , 2000 (4 )SCALE713 , (2000 )5 SCC573 , [2000 ]Supp1 SCR86 , 2001 (1 )UJ181 , ,MANU/SC/0407/2000
M. Jagannadha Rao#Y.K. Sabharwal#2MANU/SC/0199/2001208SC2210Judgment/OrderAIR#ArbLR#ECR#GLH#Gujarat Law Reporter#INSC#JT#MANU#PTC#RCR (Civil)#SCALE#SCC#SCR(Supp)#UJM. Jagannadha Rao,Chemicals#ChemicalsSUPREME COURT OF INDIA2012-9-24Trade Marks,Permanent Injunction,Trade Marks,Mandatory/Prohibitory Injunction,Trade Marks,Mandatory/Prohibitory Injunction,Trade Marks,Mandatory/Prohibitory Injunction,Trade Marks,Mandatory/Prohibitory Injunction,Deceptively similar,Preliminary,Injunctions: -Permanent/Temporary,Reliefs,Infringement Action,Categories of Marks - New varieties of registrable Trade marks,Absolute grounds for refusal of registration,The Register And Conditions For Registration,Similarity with earlier Trade Marks; Similar goods and services,Relative grounds for refusal of registration,The Register And Conditions For Registration,Similarity with earlier Trade Marks; Similar goods and services,Relative grounds for refusal of registration,The Register And Conditions For Registration,Intellectual Property Rights,Law of Injunction734,726,755,747,758,749,759,756,847,24929,24881,24861,796,786,762,775,736,20270 -->
MANU/SC/0407/2000
True Court CopyTM EnglishTrue Court CopyTM GujaratiECR
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 3341/2000 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15398/99)
Decided On: 09.05.2000
Appellants: S. M. Dyechem Ltd. Vs. Respondent: Cadbury (India) Ltd.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M. Jagannadha Rao and Y.K. Sabharwal JUDGMENT
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. In trade mark cases, the tension is between protectionism on the one hand and allowing competition on the other. In the late nineteenth century where law was regarded as a science, the legal formalists laid down principles and legal rules, treating trade mark as 'property'. In the beginning of this century, legal realists laid emphasis on pragmatic considerations of economic policies and "real world results" and the 'likelihood of confusion'. Of late, the tension between protectionism and competition has increased. (See Vol. 59 'Law and Contemporary Problems, 1996, No. 2 P.5 at p. 14) (A Personal Note on Trade Mark etc. by Milton Handler).
3. This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in A.F.O. No. 203 of 1999 dated 24.8.1999, by which the High Court of Gujarat allowed the appeal preferred by the respondent-defendant and set aside the temporary injunction which was initially granted on 25.2.99 and which was confirmed on 23.3.99. The injunction was sought by the appellant to restrain the respondent from using the word PICNIC as it allegedly amounted to infringement of the appellants' registered trade mark for the use of the word PIKNIK. The suit was on the basis of infringement of trade mark and also on the basis of passing off.
4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
5. The appellant company (plaintiff) claimed tha........