REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED Vs. MANU KOSURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this suit, the plaintiff pray for relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from registering a domain name or operating any business and/or selling, offering for sale, advertising and in any manner dealing in any services or goods on the internet or otherwise under the trade mark/domain name 'drreddyslab.com' or any other mark/domain name which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark DR. REDDY'S or that contains the said word as an essential or dominant feature thereof and from doing any other thing as is likely to lead to passing off of the business and goods of the defendants as the business and goods of the plaintiff. Also for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade mark/domain name 'drreddyslab.com' or any other mark/domain name which is identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark DR. REDDY'S for internet related services or any other business as may lead to dilution of the distinctiveness of the said trademark of the plaintiff; Also praying for damages to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendants on account of the use of the impugned mark as a domain name BESIDES rendition of accounts of profit earned by the defendants by the use of the impugned domain name AND ALSO for relief of delivery up of all impugned materials of the defendants, including brochures, stationery and other printed matter bearing the impugned name.

(2.) After filing of the suit, summons were issued to the defendants. Both the defendants despite service of summons, did not appear. There is no written statement to be proceeded ex-parte against the defendants. Plaintiff was permitted to file affidavit by way of ex-parte evidence and pursuant thereto, plaintiff filed affidavit and also the original documents.

(3.) In order to substantiate the averments in the plaint, Mr. Santosh Kutoar Nair, Company Secretary of the plaintiff company filed affidavit and testified that he is duly authorised by the plaintiff company through a Board Resolution to sign and verify the pleadings and to institute the suit; that he has access to the books/records of the plaintiff company and is fully conversant with all spheres of its business activities; that the company was established in the year 1984 for research and development activity in the field of medicine and has over above 15 years grown into a fully integrated pharmaceutical organisation with an annual turnover of over US $ 100 million or approximately Rs. 400 crores; that the plaintiff company has a strong distribution network in India and extensive operations overseas; that the company has subsidiaries in USA (Reddy Cheminor, Inc), France (Reddy Cheminor S.A. ), Singapore (Reddy Pharmaceuticals Singapore Pte. Ltd) and Hong Kong (Reddy Pharmaceuticals Hong King Ltd) and has a network of associates in more than 50 countries to market bulk pharmaceuticals and finished dosages; that the plaintiff company is a leader in organic synthesis and its products cover analgesics, antiulcerants, antimetics, X-ray contrast agents, antiussives, antihypertensives, antibacterials, anesthetics, anti-cancer compounds and lipid lowering agents among others; that the plaintiff company is also the proprietor of the trademark 'DR. REDDY'S' by virtue of priority in adoption, continuous and extensive use and advertising and the reputation consequently accruing thereto in the course of trade; that the plaintiff company and its group companies have exclusively used DR. REDDY'S as a trademark so that DR. REDDY'S is always perceived as indicative of the source of the company and its other group companies; that the trade mark DR. REDDY'S is a personal name of plaintiff company's founder and its use as a trademark in relation to pharmaceuticals is completely arbitrary; that the trademark DR. REDDY'S is a highly valuable intangible asset of plaintiff company which has the capacity to clearly distinguish Its activities from those of other traderes that the application for registration of trademark DR. REDDY'S by the company is pending and the plaintiff company has a registered domain name "drreddys.com" a print out showing the record of InterNic with regard to the said domain name registration is filed; that in the month of January, 1999, the plaintiff company was informed about the activities of defendant No. 1, who is apparently the Managing Director of defendant No. 2; that defendants are in the business of registering domain name in India and their purpose of existence appears to be to block well known trademark and even names of well-known personalities on the Internet. Having once registered as domain names, the defendants offer them for sale for large amounts; that such a practice is patently unethical and commercially unfair and it is evident that the defendants do not have any connection with the parties whose marks/names they have registered; that the registration procedure of domain names of the internet is on a "first come first served" basic and is a mere recordal without any opposition or notice to third parties; that the said domain name registrations would enable the defendants to take the next effective step of opening a website on the internet where their business profile and 243 objcctives would appear. In fact, when the plaintiff company first accessed the website on the internet to investigate the defendants activities, it was learnt that their home page bearing the domain address www.drreddyslab.com shows a clock and. the following caption :- "welcome to the future Website of drreddyslab.com"; that the function of a domain name is akin to a trade mark on the Internet and it is of vital importance in ecommerce. Therefore, on account of the increasing world wide use of the internet and its reach and implications on trade, the patential for confusion or deception being caused on account of the adoption of the impugned trademark/name by the defendants and the likelihood of damage to plaintiffs company business, goodwill and reputation by the operation of a website under the impugned domain name by them is enormous; that the defendants use of the impugned trademark/domain name DR. REDDY'S is thus aimed at diverting the business of plaintiff company and to earn easy, illegal and underserved profits by appropriating to themselves the goodwill, reputation and business of plaintiff company. The Company's losses and damage to its business would run into several lakhs of rupees on account of the fact that commercial transactions can take place through the Internet itself. The conduct of the defendants in registering domain names which are identical to the well-known trademarks and personalities names shows mala fides on their part; that the defendants threatened use of highly distinctive trademark of plaintiff company will irreparably damage its reputation and goodwill and dilute the distinctiveness of the said trademark and that the defendants unauthorised registration of the domain name containing the trademark DR. REDDY'S and unlicensed use of the trademark DR. REDDY'S on the internet or otherwise will cause irreparable loss, damage and injury to the goodwill and reputation of plaintiff company by passing off the defendants goods and business as and for those of plaintiff company or associated with it in some manner or the other.