SHORANUR METAL INDUSTRIES LLP Vs. METAL INDUSTRIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in OS 1/2023 on the file of the District Court, Palakkad are the appellants. (For the purpose of convenience the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the trial court.)

(2.) The plaintiff is a company incorporated by the Government of Kerala by name 'Metal Industries Limited'. They filed the suit for injunction, alleging infringement of its trade name by the defendants which is a firm by name 'The 'Shornur Metal Industries LLP.' According to the plaintiffs, the plaintiff/company was incorporated with the intention to manufacture iron and steel products namely agricultural tools and equipments such as sickle , spade, shovel, pickaxe, axe, saw, cutleries, mammatties and all types of agricultural allied tools and equipments. They have got a brand name 'Tusker' with an emblem. The plaintiff/company was found about 94 years back with registered office at Shornur. The products of the plaintiff/company has high demand and have adorable credibility among the people. The caption of the company was registered under Sec. 27 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and as such, no other person could infringe the registered trade mark of the plaintiff. The plaintiff/company is popularly known as 'Shornur Metal Industries', as it is situated in Shornur.

(3.) According to the plaintiffs, the 1st defendant/firm was established in 2019 and they are also manufacturing iron and steel agricultural tools and equipments like the plaintiff and it is also functioning within a radius of three kms. from the plaintiff/company. In the year 2020, the plaintiff/company understood that the name of the 1st defendant has created confusion among the public and it is still continuing. Since the 1st defendant is also using the name 'Shornur Metal Industries' the people misunderstands that the 1st defendant firm is the 1st plaintiff company. Since the 1st plaintiff's domain name is registered under the Trade Marks Act, the 1st defendant has no right or authority to use the same name as that of the 1st plaintiff for identical or deceptively similar name. The caption 'Shornur Metal Industries' has deceptive similarity to the name of the 1st plaintiff 'Metal Industries' and the intention of the defendants is to confuse the common people and other innocent buyers and small traders who are trading with the plaintiff/company for long years. The defendants' domain name is deceptively similar to the domain name of the plaintiff. Though the plaintiff/company has sent registered notice to the defendants asking them to stop using the name 'Shornur Metal Industries', they have sent a reply raising false contentions. It was in the above context that the plaintiff filed the suit seeking remedies under Ss. 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, including a permanent prohibitory injunction against using the domain caption 'Metal Industries', a mandatory injunction to remove the domain name 'Metal Industries' from the defendants' caption, officially undergoing and advertising and for damages to the tune of Rs.1,00,000.00.