ASHOK M.BHAT Vs. SANDEEP UDAI NARAIAN GUPTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these proceedings, the applicant/plaintiff is asserting its intellectual property rights in the context of its mark 'ECLAT' used in respect of cosmetic preparations like face cream, foundation, etc. It is the case of the applicant that by using the impugned mark 'ECLAT SUPERIOR' / <IMG>JUDGEMENT_116_LAWS(BOM)5_2025_1.jpg</IMG> , the contesting defendant No.1 is infringing upon the aforesaid registered trade mark of the applicant and it is also seeking to pass-off its goods as those of the applicant. Since defendant No.1 has obtained registration for its mark, the applicant is invoking the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Lupin Ltd. vs. Johnson and Johnson (2014 SCC OnLine Bom 4596), to claim that such registration can be demonstrated to be ex-facie illegal and fraudulent, which ought to shock the conscience of this Court.

(2.) The applicant claims user of its trade mark 'ECLAT' from the year 1935 onwards through its predecessor and copy of registration certificate placed on record shows that such registration dates back to 16/12/1946 with user claimed since 1/1/1935. The registered mark shows that it is a label mark of the applicant and something turns on this, as defendant No.1 has emphasized that the nature of registration obtained by the applicant in its favour, indicates that the applicant may not be able to insist upon exclusivity with regard to the word/expression 'ECLAT'.

(3.) The applicant has placed on record pleadings and supporting documents to claim that through a deed of assignment dtd. 10/10/2006, the applicant is entitled to claim proprietary rights in the said trade mark 'ECLAT' and that the applicant is indeed recorded in the register of trade marks as the proprietor of the said mark. The aforesaid material does indicate that the applicant can assert its proprietary rights in respect of the said registered trade mark.