PUMA AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT RUDOLF DASSLER SPORT Vs. BHATIA TIME

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER impugned before this Court is the order dated 18.10.2011 whereby in a suit for infringement of trademark filed by the plaintiff company namely M/s. Puma Aktiengesechaft Rudolf Dassler Sport the interim relief under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') had not been granted; the prayer made in the application under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner had also been rejected.

(2.) RECORD shows that the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff company seeking a mandatory and permanent injunction for passing off, infringement of trademark and copyright, unfair competition, damages and rendition of accounts. The defendant is Bhatia Time shop No. 220, New Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi. The plaintiff is stated to be the registered in various class of trademarks in the word mark 'PUMA' as also its logo '' including class 14 of the Trademark Rules, 2002; he is stated to have exclusive right to use all the said trademarks and logo with respect to its products including watches and clocks and parts of and fittings thereof, in a recent survey in the first week of May, 2011 he learnt that certain shopkeepers including the defendant are selling watches, clocks and parts of and fittings which bear word mark 'PUMA' as also logo ''. His contention is that name and logo on the products by the defendant being deceptively similar have created confusion in the minds of original purchaser; ex -parte injunction as also the relief that a Local Commissioner be appointed to seize the infringing goods which would be found at the disputed premises. As noted supra, both these prayers had been declined by the impugned order. Along with the suit, the documents filed by the plaintiff substantiate his case; his registered trademark which is in class 14 of the word mark 'PUMA' as also the logo '' is up to 27.07.2015; the photographs showing the impugned mark 'PUMA' as also its logo used on watches which are being sold by the defendant have also been placed on record. Prima -facie case has been made out by the plaintiff. In case an ex -parte injunction is not granted in his favour he will suffer an irreparable loss and injury; balance of convenience also lies in his favour. It is also imperative that a Local Commissioner be appointed ex -parte to seize the infringing goods; the impugned order is accordingly set aside.

(3.) THE prayer made in the application under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code is also allowed. Ms. Shyel Trehan, Advocate (Mobile No. 9810163818) is hereby appointed as Local Commissioner to visit the site i.e. 220, New Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi -110006 to do the following: -