REVION MANUFACTURING LIMITED Vs. K V INTERNATIONAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court The suit above relates to action for infringement and Passing Off of the mark "Charlie" proprietorship of which is claimed by the plaintiff against the defendants. The aforesaid interlocutory application has been taken out by the plaintiff. At the ad interim stage this Court on prima facie satisfaction passed an order in terms of prayers (a) to (c) of the Notice of Motion. Upon hearing both the parties on 27th July, 2005 the Receiver has been appointed with direction to visit the office of the respondent No. 1 and also any other place, shops and godowns where the finished products were available and to submit a report to this Court. Since the said interim order is continuing, now question of vacation of the same has arisen upon reading of the affidavit of the respondent No.1. The short fact of the case as made out in the petition on which the aforesaid interim order was passed is briefly set out hereunder: The petitioner/plaintiff is a world leader in cosmetics, fragrance, skin care and personal care products. The petitioner's trade mark Revlon and Charlie have global brand recognition. In 1972 the petitioner introduced the Charlie fragrance. The petitioner is the registered proprietor of the trade mark "Charlie" and its variations and has registrations throughout the world. The petitioner's trade mark Charlie has acquired transborder reputation, goodwill and commands immense international sales. Pursuant to a deed of assignment dated 29th December, 1993 between the Revlon(Suisee) S.A., the predecessor-in interest of the petitioner and the petitioner several registered trade marks including the trade mark "Charlie" were assigned to the petitioner. By reason of the aforesaid the petitioner is the present proprietor of the trade mark Charlie and its variants. In fact registration certificates for the mark Charlie after 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the assignment) are in the name of the petitioner. The proprietary interest of the petitioner in the said mark has in fact been recognized by the Delhi High Court when the petitioner had filed a suit being No. 2090 of 1997 an order dated 13th October, 1997 was passed by the said Court thereby the respondents were restrained from using the trade mark Revlon and Charlie or any other deceptively similar mark in respect of cosmetics and other goods. The respondent subsequently approached the petitioner to settle the matter on 19th April, 2001 the matter was decreed in terms of the settlement executed by the petitioner and the respondent.

(2.) From a survey conducted by the petitioner in Calcutta in January 2005 it was revealed that despite the decree passed in the suit filed in Delhi Court the respondents are continuing to infringe and/or pass off the petitioner's registered trade mark "Charlie" under a different name.

(3.) The defendant No. 1 has filed affidavit-in-opposition affirmed by one Mrs. Rachna Virmani who is the proprietress of the defendant No. 1 is no way connected with the product of the defendant No.1. The respondent No. 1 basically disputed all the material allegations made in the petition. It is stated in the affidavit in opposition that no copy of the deed of assignment has been produced though the respondent No. 1 through her learned Advocate demanded for supply of a copy of the deed of assignment has been shown on October 14, 2005. In spite of request neither the deed of assignment nor any copy thereof has been furnished to the respondent No. 1 or her Advocate. As such the plaintiff/petitioner has failed to prove that it is the registered proprietor of the mark "Charlie".