HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED Vs. SUSI CHEMICAL PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, named above, has filed the presentsufor permanent injunction and for rendition of accounts, averring that the plaintiis a Company, incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 195having its registered office at Hindustan Lever House. 165-66, Backbay Reclamtion, Bombay with a branch office at Express Building, Bahadur Shah Zafar Mar;New Delhi and that Shri P.N. Monga, Branch Legal Manager of the plaintiCompany is competent to sign and verify the plaint and to institute the present suon behalf of the plaintiff-Company.

(2.) The claim of the plaintiffs has been resisted by the defendants who have fileda written statement taking certain preliminary objections with regard to jurisdiction and maintainability of the suit. On merits, it has been contended in the writtenstatement that the colour combination scheme of blue, white and red colours, usedin the wrappers by the plaintiff-Company for marketing the detergent cakes, hasbecome quite common to the trade for the last so many years and a large numberof manufacturers of detergent cakes are using the said colour scheme openly for the last so many years is respect of their wrappers for sale of their products ofdetergent cakes. It is further stated in the written statement that the size and weightof the detergent cakes of all the manufacturers are also the same as governed by theWeight and Measurement Rules. It is contended that the wrappers used by thedefendants cannot at all cause any confusion or deception in the market and tradeand that the mark 'STEP' is depicted on the label of the defendants so prominentlyand boldely that it seems reckless to say that even an illiterate person can beconfused or deceived by the defendant's detergent cake 'STEP' when he actuallywants to buy plaintiff's detergent 'RIN'. It is stated in the written statement thatthe present suit filed by the plaintiffs merits dismissal being false, frivolous andvexatious. It is prayed that the same be dismissed with costs.

(3.) The plaintiffs have filed a replication, controverting the contentions raisedin written statement and reiterating the averments made in the plaint.