JAWAHAR ENGINEERING CO Vs. JAVAHAR ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED
LAWS(DLH)-1983-2-5
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on February 16,1983

JAWAHAR ENGINIRING COMPANY Appellant
VERSUS
JAVAHAR ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RULDU SINGH V. SANWAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SHAH BABULAL KHIMJI VS. JAYABEN D KANIA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

MOHAN KUMAR VS. NARENDRA PRODUCTS [LAWS(DLH)-1995-7-18] [REFERRED]
EXPORTS UNLIMITED VS. DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-1996-3-2] [REFERRED]
P M DIESELS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. PATEL FIELD MARSHAL INDUSTRIES [LAWS(DLH)-1998-3-46] [REFERRED]
INDIAN HERBS REASERCH AND SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED VS. LALJI MAL [LAWS(DLH)-2001-10-135] [REFERRED TO]
HARYANA MILK FOODS LIMITED VS. CHAMBEL DAIRY PRODUCTS [LAWS(DLH)-2002-5-106] [REFERRED TO]
SOCIETE DES PRODUITS NESTLE S.A. AND ORS. VS. ITALIAN EDIBLES PVT. LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-9-432] [REFERRED TO]
DHODHA HOUSE VS. S K MAINGI [LAWS(SC)-2005-12-25] [REFERRED TO]
P M DIESEL LTD VS. PATEL FIELD MARSHALL INDUSTRIES [LAWS(DLH)-2008-8-268] [REFERRED TO]
MANMOHAN SHARMA VS. MANJIT SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2016-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
IMPRESARIO ENTERTAINMENT & HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. VS. S & D HOSPITALITY [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-2] [REFERRED TO]
FMC CORPORATION VS. NATCO PHARMA LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-2020-7-35] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D.K.K.apnr, J. - (1.)The respondents filed a suit against the defendants on the basis of a registered trade mark claiming a perpetual injunction, passing off and rendition of accounts, on the Original Side of this Court. The claim of the plaintiffs was that they had a registered trade mark 'Javahar' in respect of diesel oil engines. According to the plaintiffs, the defendants had applied for registration of the trade mark 'Jawahar' in respect of diesel oil engines for the States of U.P., Punjab, Haryana, Bihar, Rajasthan and the Union Territories of Delhi and Chandigarh. This application No. 291514B was advertised in the Trade Mark Journal. The object of the suit was to injunct the defendants from using the trade-mark 'Jawahar' or a deceptively similar trade mark.
(2.)A preliminary issue was framed on the pleadings in the suit as follows:-
"Has this Court jurisdiction to try the suit?"
On this issue, evidence was examined on the basis of which it was held that there was no evidence that there had been any sale of these diesel oil engines in Delhi. Furthermore, the defendants claimed that they had not advertised in Delhi about their product. The Court held that the jurisdiction of the Court could not be invoked on the ground of an actual sale in Delhi, but held that there had been an advertisement in ajournal called 'Parwez' which is published in Ludhiana. The learned Single Judge held that these advertisements were not sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the Courts in Delhi. On the other hand, the Court observed that there had been an advertisement in the Trade Marks Journal published by the Registrar of Trade Marks at Delhi which conferred jurisdiction on the Courts at Delhi.
(3.)The defendants have appealed against the decision of the learned Single Judge and a preliminary objection has been raised regarding the maintainability of the appeal. It was urged by learned counsel for the appellants that the appeal is maintainable in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Shah Babuhl Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania and another, A.1.R. 1981, S.G. 1786, which has impliedly over-ruled the Full Bench decision of this Court regarding the scope of an appeal under the Letters Patent or Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act applicable to this Court. It was also brought to our notice that the Full Bench decision had in a subsequent case been expressly over-ruled. We agree that this is the correct position.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.