BENGAL WATERPROOF LIMITED Vs. BENGAL RUBBER COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed this action for infringement of the trade mark "Duckback".

(2.) The plaintiff is a pioneer in manufacturing waterproof products like gumboots, raincoats, rubber cloths and the like. The plaintiff was established in the year 1920 by renowned Bose family of Bengal. The first defendant was promoted as a subsidiary of the plaintiff. The first defendant was incorporated in the year 1971 and it set up a plant at Ranchi. The first defendant is also into manufacturing waterproof items. The products of the plaintiff were and are being sold under the trade mark "Duckback". The plaintiff claims that "Duckback" is synonymous with the members of the Bose family who are the descendants of the original founders. The said trade mark is used by the plaintiff since inception. In order to protect the right of the plaintiff in relation to such products, the plaintiff as owner of the trade mark "Duckback" applied for registration of the word mark and as a label mark in the year 1942. The said registrations are still valid and subsisting.

(3.) Initially the dispute arose between the plaintiff and the defendants with regard to the control and management of the defendant No.1. This has given rise to two suits, one filed by the defendant No.2 and the other by the plaintiff. The defendant No.2 in its suit sought, inter alia, for a decree for perpetual injunction restraining the present plaintiff and the defendant No.1 from revoking or terminating the registered user agreement dated 25th February 2008 as modified by the agreement dated 20th February 2010 read with the letter of undertaking dated 26th February 2010 issued by the plaintiff to the defendant No.2. The defendant No.2 in the suit also prayed for specific performance of an agreement dated 25th February 2010 alleged to have been entered into between the defendant No.2 and the defendant No.1. The defendant No.2 in the said suit has also prayed for an order of injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the defendant No.2's right to use the trade mark "Duckback" through the instrumentality of the defendant No.1. The plaintiff in the instant suit has filed a subsequently suit being CS No. 156 of 2011 praying, inter alia, for declaration that certain Board meetings allegedly held on 24th May 2011 and 4th June 2011 by the defendant No.1 is to be declared null and void and for other consequential reliefs. The second suit was essentially for management of the defendant No.1.