KARAMCHAND APPLIANCES PVT LTD Vs. SH ADHIKARI BROTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A producer of consumer goods whether the same be expensive automobiles or items of daily use like toiletries is in the words of Lord Diplock 'unlikely to find a path beaten to his door' in the absence of an expensive advertising campaign. Who hasn't heard of the Cola war, or noticed campaigns where one producer compares his goods with those of his competitors, more often than not making claims which are exaggerated that end up confusing the consumer no end. With the electronic media, emerging as the most powerful instrument for dissemination of information and the ever increasing dependence of the consumers on the same, nothing really matters unless it is visible on the small screen that today has found a place in every household including those in rural India. The fight for a larger market share unleashes economic battles most of which get settled in the market place, but there are some that refuse to die down and eventually end up in the Court. Recourse to legal proceedings is in such cases guided by sound economic considerations for the battle in the market place can turn bloody, considering the fact that the resources of those engaged in the fight are unlimited.

(2.) The parties to the present suit have locked horns in somewhat familiar circumstances. The fight is over an advertisement campaign meant to promote sale of Mosquito Repellents, which both the parties are manufacturing and marketing. The plaintiff has prayed for an order restraining the defendants from telecasting what is described as GOOD KNIGHT TURBO REFILL commercial, which according to the former disparages its product and results to dilution of its brands.

(3.) The plaintiff's case, as set out in the plaint, is that it is engaged in manufacturing and marketing a range of household insecticides and mosquito repellents since the year 1992. These products come in various forms including, coils, mats, liquid vapourisers etc. and are sold under the well-known brands ALL OUT and BAYGON. The plaintiff claims to have carned over the years' reputation of being a quality oriented company which is constantly innovating new products and focusing on product development in order to ensure that the products are both efficient in functioning and safe for everyday use. It was, according to the plaintiff, the first company in India to start its business in liquid vapourisers, which was seen as a revolution in 'mosquito repellent product' industry. It claims to have designed different apparatus for use of liquid vapourisers, which are extremely popular in the market. The first variety of these vapourisers was 'ALL OUT Liquid Plug in vapouriser'. which was later improved upon so as to make the transparent top cover glow and function like a night lamp. The second variety in this range introduced in 1998 and 2000 offered apparatus in flourscent orange, green and purple colours. Both the varieties are called pluggy models which have been extensively used in the plaintiff's advertising campaigns in Print and Electronic Media. The plaintiff's case is that the image of the ALL OUT pluggy immediately connects the brand and the product with the plaintiff. It also claims to be the market leader in liquid vapourisers business with a 63% share for its apparatus.