LAWS(DLH)-2012-10-194

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM PLC Vs. SUNIL SARMALKAR

Decided On October 05, 2012
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM PLC Appellant
V/S
SUNIL SARMALKAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject suit has been filed by the plaintiffs seeking the reliefs of injunction, rendition of accounts, etc. with respect to two trade marks namely PARAMAX and PANAMAX which are stated to be used by the plaintiffs for paracetamol tablets. The defendants are stated to be using the mark "Effer-PARAMAX" for dissolvable paracetamol tablets.

(2.) The suit so far as the reliefs qua the trade mark PANAMAX is concerned is based on the registration of the trade mark in India. The registration certificate has been filed and proved on record as Ex.PW1/2. So far as the relief qua the trade mark PARAMAX is concerned, the suit is based on the ground of passing off inasmuch as there is no registration of the said trade mark in India.

(3.) Defendants initially appeared and filed a joint written statement. They thereafter stopped appearing and were proceeded exparte. The defendants were restrained by the exparte order dated 28.5.2003 from manufacturing and selling paracetamol tablets under the trademarks of the plaintiffs and which order has been confirmed. The defendants it appears have thus stopped manufacturing and selling and may be therefore not interested in contesting the suit.