JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard Shri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Padmakar Pandey and Shri Sunil Kumar
Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for
opposite party no.1 and Shri Abhishek Tripathi, learned counsel
for the opposite party no.2
(2.) This application has been filed praying for quashing charge sheet dated 29.7.2018 alongwith cognizance order dated
16.8.2018 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in case no. 44080 of 2018 under sections 406,
420, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. pending before the aforesaid court. The opposite party no.2 lodged a First Information Report dated
11.4.2018 against the applicants alleging that there is a company M/s Hazari Lal Laxmi Prasad Naryan (P) Limited situated in
building no. 96/11A Parade, Kanpur Nagar of which Late Chunni
Lal Gupta was the Managing Director. Now opposite party no.2
and his brother, Dinesh Kumar, applicant no.1, are Directors of
the aforesaid Company. The aforesaid company purchased the
business of "Kannico Dry Cleaners" in the year 1988 and the
business of Dry Cleaning continued upto the year 2007. In the
year 2002 applicant no.2, who is wife of his brother, Dinesh
Kumar Gupta, applicant no.1, on account of ulterior motives
started business in the same name and style of "Kannico Dry
Cleaners" showing herself as its proprietor. The applicants never
got any resolution passed from the company for opening new
firm nor they gave any information to the Managing Director of
the company, late Chunni Lal Gupta. By opening business of
"Kannico Dry Cleaners" in their name, the applicants earned
profit of Rs. Two crores. The wife of applicant no.1 by showing
herself proprietor of "Kannico Dry Cleaners" submitted
application before the Registrar dated 26.11.2015 for the
purpose of registration of Trade Mark along with applicants they
submitted form TM(1) for the purpose of getting Trade Mark
registered in the name of "Kannico Dry Cleaners Company and
got the same registered showing business from the year
2002.Therefore they succeeded in establishing a firm parallel to company, M/s Hazari Lal Laxmi Narayan (P) Ltd., by giving
wrong information to the Trade Mark department.The applicant
also threatened the opposite party no.2 of life in case he does
not refrains from inquiry against the opposite party no.2
(3.) Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that allegations in the First Information Report is that
the opposite party no.2 obtained Trade mark in the name of
"Kannico Dry Cleaners" without any resolution of the board by
preparing forged papers and has earned profit illegally. It has
been submitted that after the death of founder of "Kannico", the
father of the applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2, it was closed
in the year 2010 on account of mismanagement and non deposit
of income tax return in time. Thereafter applicant no.2 on
23.11.2015 applied before the Registrar Trade Mark to save the brand name of "Kannico Dry Cleaners" and started business
after issuance of certificate dated 3.2.2017 .As yet no objection
has been filed for cancellation of Trade Mark allotted to her when
there is remedy under section 77 of the Trade Mark Act to this
effect. Under section 57 of Trade Trade Mark Act there is power
vested in the registrar to cancel or vary the registration but in the
absence of any objection by the opposite party no.2 nothing has
been done. The applicants have already instituted original suit
no. 984 of 2017 against the opposite party no.2 to restrain the
defendants not to interfere in the business of the applicant by
using the trade mark in the name of "Kannico Dry Cleaners". It
has further been submitted that opposite party no.2 has also
instituted original suit no. 148 of 2018 against the applicant no.1
for restraining him from illegally dispossessing defendants from
the suit property and interfere in any manner in their businessin
building no. 96/11-A Parade, Kanpur Nagar.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.