RIGHTWAY Vs. RIGHTWAYS FOOT WEAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit for infringement of Copy Right, passing off of trademark and trade name, etc., the plaintiff has made two applications for restraining the defendants from using his trade name and trademark, etc.

(2.) Facts relevant for the disposal of the interim applications are summarized as under : The plaintiff is a firm which conducts partnership business. It is manufacturing footwears and travelling luggage and conducts sale of manufactured goods such as footwear, travelling luggage, etc. The said sale is conducted under the trademark 'Rightway', with device of Foot in a distinctive manner. This trademark is used by the plaintiff since 1967. This trademark is written in a particular style and the plaintiff has applied for its registration under the provisions of law. The trade-mark and the goods sold by the plaintiff have acquired reputation with the public. Goods of the plaintiff are identified by the trade-mark under which they are sold because it has its own colour, scheme, design and label. Huge amount has been invested by the plaintiff on publicity of its trademark and trade name throughout India. As a result of the plaintiff's investment, the plaintiff's trade-mark and trade name (sic) throughout India. As a result of the plaintiff's investment, the plaintiff's trade-mark "rightway" has acquired goodwill and reputation and they conduct sales worth lacs of rupees. The defendants are said to be aware of all these facts and about the reputation the trade-mark and trade name of the plaintiff has acquired. They have started manufacturing and selling foot ware under the trademark 'Rightway Foot ware with a device of foot in exactly the same manner in which the plaintiff is using the trade-mark. The overall lay out, design, lettering style of "Rightway" mark used by the defendants is identical with that which is used by the plaintiff and the defendants are therefore by deceptive means using the goodwill, reputation of the plaintiff's firm by using "Rightway" label. The defdts. are misrepresenting the customers about the "Rightway" trade-mark and trade name and are giving out that they are conducting business as associates of the plaintiff. The defendants are thereby passing off their goods as the goods of the plaintiff. These acts are said to be injurious to the interests of the plaintiff as they are intended to cause harm to the plaintiff and to their trade-mark. On this basis various reliefs restraining the defendants from using the trademark and trade-name is sought in the plaint.

(3.) The defendants have filed their written statement; they have denied the plaintiff's allegations. It is the case of the defendants that so many other people are using the label "Rightway" in Leh. The defendants are not using the "Rightway" as such but their firm is registered as "New Rightway" which is different and distinct. Some time back the defendants used to purchase goods from the plaintiff and they were given the sign-board for their shop as "Rightway Foot ware Leh". Therefore, the plaintiff is now estopped from challenging the right of the defendants to use the name "Rightway Foot-ware" It is stated that the plaintiff's trademark was not registered whereas the defendant's trademark as "New Rightway Foot ward" is registered. Therefore, also the suit of the plaintiff is resisted.