GODREJ AGROVET LTD Vs. ROHIT AGROVET PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. Respondents waive service. With the consent of the learned Counsel taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) THE dispute in the present case arises out of the use of the mark "godrej Milk More" by the Appellants on their cattle feed products. The First Respondent, it is common ground, is also carrying on a similar line of business. The Appellants have commenced the use of the mark since 1997 and the details of their sales between 1997 and 2001 which were furnished before the Trial Court are as follows : The Appellants admittedly have the prior user of the mark. On 10th September 1998, the Appellants have filed an application before the Registrar of Trade Marks for the registration of the trade mark "milk More". The Respondents commenced the use of the same mark "milk More" on their products of cattle feed, upon which on 30th November 2000, a "cease and desist" notice was issued by the Appellants to the Respondents. A reply to the aforesaid notice was furnished by the Respondents on 21st December 2000 and it is the case of the Appellants that thereupon the Respondents ceased to use the mark "milk More". A suit was instituted by the Appellants before the District Court, Sangli on 15th May 2001 on the basis of an action for passing off, claiming that a few days prior to the institution of the suit, the Respondents had commenced the marketing and sale of their product this time under the mark "milk Much More". The Appellants claim that they have an established market for their product which has a substantial turn over and that they have incurred a considerable amount of expenditure in marketing the sales of their product. The case of the Appellants is that the mark which has been utilised by the Respondents is deceptively similar to that of the Appellants and is liable to cause confusion and deception amongst the members of the pubic.

(3.) IN the suit that was instituted before the District Court, an application for interim relief was made which came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 19th May 2001. The learned Trial Judge has adverted to the contention of the Appellants that it is only after the Appellants issued a notice dated 30th November 2000 to the Respondents on the earlier occasion that the Respondents stopped selling under the trade name "milk More". The contention of the Respondents, however, which weighed with the District Judge in declining relief is that the products of the Respondents are being sold under the mark "krishna Milk Much More", whereas the Appellants use the mark "godrej Milk More". In the circumstances, it was sought to be urged that there is a difference between the trade mark which is used by the Appellants and the trade mark which is used by the Respondents. The learned Trial Judge was of the view that there was a great difference between the two trade marks. Having said this, the learned Judge in paragraph 15 of the order, made the following observations: