FLEXITUFF INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs. TIRUPATI SPRINKLERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes up for re-considering the temporary injunction application afresh in view of order dated 19.5.2017 passed by Division Bench in DB Civil Misc. Appeal No.1168/2017.

(2.) In brief the factual matrix of the case are that the plaintiff- petitioner filed a suit under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 for the alleged infringement of its registered design under the Act. The plaintiff pleaded that the plaintiff is manufacturing drippers for drip irrigation along with other products at its Kashipur unit. It is claimed in the plaint that engineers had been engaged in developing a particular design of drippers since 2010 and for the first time in India drippers with attractive and effective design were developed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff applied for registration of the design of drippers on 11.9.2013 and the design of plaintiff was registered under the provisions of the Designs Act on 25.9.2013 with effect from 11.9.2013. It is further pleaded by the plaintiff that plaintiff spent around 17 lac rupees for developing the particular design. The design which was developed was of 40 mm, the same was sent to renowned dripper designer at Israel and size of the drippers was got reduced from 40 mm to 32 mm.

(3.) It is contended by the plaintiff-petitioner that plaintiff being the registered proprietor for the said design of drippers, had exclusivity with regard to its use. It came to the notice of the plaintiff in April 2015 that drippers with identical design to that of the plaintiff's registered design, was being sold by the defendant in the market. Along with the suit, application for temporary injunction has been filed to restrain the defendant from manufacturing, marketing and selling drippers.