LAWS(DLH)-2003-5-51

MICRONIX INDIA Vs. J R KAPOOR

Decided On May 15, 2003
MICRONIX INDIA Appellant
V/S
J.R.KAPOOR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short controversy involved in this suit is whether the trademark `MICROTEL' used by the defendant is deceptively similar to the trade mark `MICRONIX' of which the plaintiff is the registered proprietor and as such amounts to infringement of its trademark. Second objection is with regard to the identical use of logo. Logo `M' is being used by the plaintiff. The defendant is also using the same logo though on the well of the letter M the word `I' appears. Third grievance is with regard to the two labels used by the defendant which according to the plaintiff are deceptively similar as according to the plaintiff cartons, labels being used by it are having unique colour scheme, placement which are literary work and therefore use of the identical labels and cartons amounts to infringement of copyright. Fourth grievance is use of the identical name of firm of the plaintiff by the defendant. Plaintiff's firm's name is MICRONIX INDIA whereas defendant has adopted the name MICROTELEMATIX which according to the plaintiff amounts to passing off action.

(2.) In order to show underlying intention of the defendant to encash upon the reputation and goodwill of the trademark which is being used for electronic items as well as logo on the label and deceptively similar name of the plaintiff, the plaintiff has referred to the following background which is like this:-

(3.) Both the parties entered into a partnership business under the name and style of M/s MICRONIX INDIA in 1977. However, they pulled on well for more than 14-15 years but parted their ways sometime on 14.2.1992 by way of compromise. By virtue of the said compromise, the defendant retired from the partnership business and upon dissolution of the firm, all the assets, liabilities, goodwill, running business, Trade name, Trade mark etc were taken over by the continuing partners. A sum of Rs.1 lakh and some machineries came to the share of the defendant. The plaintiff firm, when defendant was one of its partners, got the trademark MICRONIX registered in respect of electrical, electronics apparatus and instruments, T.V.tuners, T.V.Boosters etc. on 19.11.1986. However, after the retirement of defendant from partnership in 1992, other two continuing partners became subsequent proprietors of trade mark, logo and label.