THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN CS.No.428 of 2010
1. V.Lakshminarayanaswamy
2. Suguna Lakshminarayanaswamy Plaintiffs Vs
1. Natarajan, Proprietor/Partner Viji Electric Works and Sri Sai Motor Industry, Chennai-1
2. Viji Electric Works, represented by its Proprietor/Partner Chennai-1
3. Sri Sai Motor Industry represented by its Proprietor/Partner, Chennai-1 Defendants Prayer:- This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC and read with Sections 29, 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, for the reliefs as stated therein.
For Plaintiff : M/s.GMS Law Associates For Defendant : Mr.V.Balasubramanian, DD1&2 JUDGEMENT This civil suit had been filed to pass a judgement and decree, against the Defendants:-
(a) granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from in any manner using the word 'SUGUNA' or logo gram or any other mark, name, logo, monogram, device or label that is identical or deceptively similar to the said registered trademarks of the Plaintiffs under trademark registration numbers 223779, 614081 and 833289 all in class 7 or to market, sell, offer for sale, license, advertise, display or indirectly to deal in any goods and/or services, that amounts to infringement of the Plaintiffs said registered trademarks.
(b) granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendants jointly and severally from in any manner infringing the copy right of the Plaintiffs in the artistic work of , by use in any manner whatsoever so as to amount to an infringement of the Plaintiffs copyright in the said artistic work.
(c) granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, jointly and severally and their men from in any manner passing off in any manner whatsoever any goods and/or services under the trademark of the Plaintiffs SUGUNA or SUSI SUGUNA or under any other mark, name, logo, monogram, device or label that is identical or deceptively similar to these trademarks.
(d) directing the Defendants to pay the Plaintiffs a sum of Rs.10,50,000/- by way of damages.
(e) granting a preliminary decree in favour of the Plaintiffs directing the Defendants jointly and severally to render a true and faithful account of all profits made by them, using the Plaintiffs said registered trademarks and a final decree be passed in favour of the Plaintiffs for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by the Defendants with interest after the Defendants have rendered account.
(f) directing the Defendants jointly and severally to deliver to the Plaintiffs for destruction of all packaging, labels, blocks, dyes, all other print materials, stickers, signage, visitng cards, letter heads, catalogues, pamphlets, broachers all other advertising and promotional material, all stationery and such other material which infringe the trademark of the Plaintiffs SUGUNA & SI Monogram, SUSI SUGUNA and the Plaintiffs copyright in the artistic work.
(g) directing the Defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
2. The case of the Plaintiff as set out in the plaint, is as follows:-
a. The 1st Plaintiff is the husband of the 2nd Plaintiff. The father of the 2nd Plaintiff, late G.Ramaswamy had started his business at Coimbatore as a proprietary Firm under the name and style of Suguna Industries and had been carrying on the business of manufacturing and selling pumps, motors and related goods, including exporting of the same. In 1964, he had obtained registration of the trademarks SUGUNA and SI Monogram, claiming user from the year 1959, under registration nos.223779, 614081 and 833289 in class 7 for motors and grinding machines. During the course of the business expansion, he had also got registration of the trademarks for their additional goods such as jet pumps, submersible pumps, mono bloc pumps and coupled pumpsets of various models and sizes, pistons, electric motors. The said trademarks have been periodically renewed and are in force till date. The Plaintiffs are also the owners of various other trademarks. After demise of G.Ramasamy, through a Will dated 18.12.2006 executed by him in favour of the Plaintiffs, the entire properties of the deceased G.Ramasamy devolved on the Plaintiffs. As such, the Plaintiffs became the owners of all the properties of the deceased Ramasamy.
b. On 3.7.2009, the Plaintiffs had entered into a partnership deed under the name and style of Suguna Industries and consequently, Plaintiffs continue to be the proprietors of the trademarks and copyright in their individual capacity as joint owners. The monogram contains the letters 'S' and 'I' in an artistic manner within a outer ring of two circles, out of which, the outer circle is thicker than the inner circle. Above the circles, the word SUGUNA is portrayed in a semicircular fashion. The said artistic work is as depicted below:-
c. The said artistic work cum monogram was created by the Late Ramasamy in 1959. The sales figures has been gradually increased from Rs.18,84,97,909/- for the year 1999-2000 to Rs.273,36,99,035/- for the year 2008-2009 in respect of the trademarks SUGUNA and SI Monogram and Rs.7,02,81,419/- for the year 1999-2000 to Rs.117,07,08,899/- for the year 2008-2009 in respect of the trademark SUSI SUGUNA. The Plaintiffs have also spent huge sums of money for promoting the said trademarks and copyright by different medias, which would come to Rs.3,85,16,020/- and Rs.23,79,292/- for the said two trademarks. The Plaintiffs have 35 dealers and 65 distributors. The trademarks of the Plaintiffs have become well known and earned reputation and good will in the market.
d. In March 2010, the Plaintiffs came to know that the Defendants, who are neither the authorised dealers nor the authorised distributors of any of the goods of the Plaintiffs or the licensee of their trademarks and copyright, are manufacturing and selling motors under the trademark SUJI SUGUNA, which is identical and deceptively similar to that of the Plaintiffs and are also using the said trademarks in all types of their business materials. The 1st Defendant is the Proprietor/Partner of the Defendants 2 and 3. The infringing goods are manufactured by the 3rd Defendant and sold by the Defendants jointly and severally. Hence, all the Defendants are jointly and severally liable, as the use of the trademarks of the Plaintiffs by the Defendants would amount to violation of the provisions under Section 28 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, would amount to infringement as per Section 28 of the said Act, would amount to infringement as per Section 55 of the Copyright Act and also passing off by the Defendants of their goods as that of the Plaintiffs, which creates confusion and deception among the public and trade. In such circumstances, this suit has been filed for the reliefs as stated above.
3. Though the service had been completed on Defendants long back, no written statement had been filed by the Defendants, in spite of sufficient opportunity given to them on the several representations of the learned counsel for the Defendants and hence, the matter was ordered to be listed under the caption of "Undefended Board". For non filing of the Written Statement, the Defendants were set exparte and Exparte Evidence was ordered by the order of this court dated 04.11.2016. One V.S.Subramanian, one of the Managers of the Plaintiffs, on behalf of the Plaintiffs, has filed the proof affidavit for his chief examination and receipt of 16 documents as documentary evidence to prove the suit claim. In the Exparte Evidence, the said Manager examined himself as PW.1 and marked Exs.P1 to P16 as documentary evidence in order to prove the suit claim.
4. In this civil suit, the Plaintiff had claimed a sum of Rs.10,50,000/- as damages under the relief (d). The Plaintiff had also paid a court fee of Rs.14,025/-. On a perusal of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the Plaintiffs, this court finds no concrete evidence to show that the Plaintiffs had sustained loss of profit and the loss of reputation and consequently, the claim towards damages as claimed by the Plaintiffs cannot be granted as it is. However, since the trademarks and the copyright of the Plaintiffs has been established by valid oral and documentary evidence, only a lump sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) can be granted.
5. With regard to the other reliefs, except the relief (d), there are valid evidence, both oral and documentary, adduced by the Plaintiffs. Therefore, taking into consideration the materials on record, particularly, the certificate of registration of the trademark of the Plaintiffs, this Court is of the view that the other reliefs, except the relief (d) as prayed for by the Plaintiff, can be granted, along with costs.
6. In the result, this civil suit is decreed as prayed for with respect to the reliefs (a), (b), (c), (e), (f) and (g), with costs, except the relief (d). In respect of the relief (d), this civil is decreed for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only). Time for payment is three months.
.01.2017 Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Srcm
1. List of Witnesses Examined on the side of the Plaintiff:-
1. P.W.1 – V.S.Subramanian
2. List of Exhibits Marked on the side of the Plaintiff:-
3. List of Witnesses Examined on the side of the defendants:- Nil
4. List of Exhibits Marked on the side of the defendants:-
Nil 06.01.2017 Srcm C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
Srcm Pre-Delivery Judgement in CS.No.428 of 2010 06.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in