MAYA APPLIANCES PRIVATE LIMITED NO 2 OLD NO 8 BOAT CLUB I AVENUE CHENNAI 28 Vs. PIGEON APPLIANCES PRIVATE LIMITED NO 27 I FLOOR MALIGE COMPLEX SUBRAMANYA ROAD CHICKALASANDRA BANGALORE 560 061

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant/plaintiff has filed the suit (i ) for a judgment and decree against the respondents/defendants for a declaration that the plaintiff is the owner of the trade mark CHEFPRO and CHEFPRO PLUS, (ii) for a declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the copyright in the lay out, colour scheme, get up, design, artistic work, etc. , of the CHEFPRO and CHEFPROPLUS series of mixer grinders and its accessories, (iii) for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants, their servants, agents, employees from in any manner passing off the defendant's goods as that of the plaintiff's by selling, advertising or offering to sell or using the plaintiff's Trade Marks or any mark or product which is identical with confusingly similar or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's Trade Marks and/or lay out, colour scheme, get up, design, artistic work, etc., of the products, and (iv) for permanent, injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, employees from in any manner infringing the copyright in the design,, configuration and technical specifications, l ayout, colour scheme, get up, contents of the instruction manual, artistic work and/or literary work comprised in/reproduced on the plaintiff's products.

(2.) THE contentions of the applicant/plaintiff are as follows: THE applicant, a partnership firm, was established in 1978 as MAYA APPLIANCES & CONTROL EQUIPMENTS. THE applicant spent considerable time and resources in Research and Development and within two years of establishment, the applicant introduced mixer grinders into the market in May 1980. In 1981 the applicant formed a new partnership firm MIXIES AND APPLIANCES. In 1985 the applicant introduced new mixie range under the Trade Mark PREETHI, which was subsequently registered as a trade mark. THE applicant through its product range has acquired a distinct reputation and goodwill both in India and several countries abroad for their superior quality and technical excellence. THE applicant's bra nd PREETHI owing to its superior quality is a popular household name and in the last 25 years of its existence, is an undisputed market leader in a whole range of kitchen appliances. THE applicant is engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and after sales services in the range of kitchen appliances viz. , mixer grinders, coffee makers, micro oven and electric cookers under popular brand PREETHI among various other trade marks. THE products of the applicant meet international quality and safety standards certified by various international certifying bodies. THE applicant has over sixteen lakh customer base both in India and several countries abroad. THE applicant has more than 22 branches, 2000 dealers and more than 300 authorised service centers across India.

(3.) IN August 2002, one Mr.Rajendra J.Gandhi representing the 2nd and 3rd respondent approached the applicant to do business with the applicant. The said Rajendra J.Gandhi during the visit of the applicant's factory was explained the requirement and handed over a sample of the applicant's CHEFPRO and CHEFPROPLUS jars and drawings and the applicant gave clearance or production of jars for his products. The 2nd and 3rd respondents supplied a total number of 3550 jars to the applicant out of which 1104 jars were rejected due to nonconformity on the basis of quality Control INward INspection carried out by the applicant. The said Rajendra J Gandhi had assured the applicant to deliver jars in compliance with the quality specifications of the applicant. The applicant was thoroughly misled by the false assurance from the said Rajendra J Gandhi of the respondents and in July 2003 sent fresh technical drawings with quality specifications for development of jars, simultaneously asking for the price quotation from the respondents for manufacturing the same. The respondents neither responded to the communication, nor sent their quotation for production of the specified jars.