HINDUSTHAN LEVER LIMITED Vs. GODREJ SOAPS LIMITED
LAWS(CAL)-1996-4-10
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on April 11,1996

HINDUSTHAN LEVER LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
GODREJ SOAPS LIMITED Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

LOCAN V. BANK OF SCOTLAND [REFERRED TO]
CONTINENTAL PAPER BAG CO. V. EASTERN BAG CO. [REFERRED TO]
FRAZER V. EVANS [REFERRED TO]
SMITH V. GRIGG LTD. [REFERRED TO]
NORTON V. NORTON [REFERRED TO]
HUBBARD V. VOSPER [REFERRED TO]
SAUDI INDIA NAVIGATION LINE V. ASTEROID MARITIME LTD. [REFERRED TO]
WIND SURFING INTERNATIONAL INC. V. TABUR MARINE (GREAT BRITAIN) LTD. [REFERRED TO]
ABIDIN DAVER [REFERRED TO]
GILLETTE SAFETY RAZOR CO. V. ANGLO AMERICAN TRADING CO. LTD. [REFERRED TO]
HICK MAN V. ANDREWS [REFERRED TO]
BRUPAT V. SANDFORD MASION PRODUCTS [REFERRED TO]
MAC SHANNON V. ROCKWARE GLASS LTD. [REFERRED TO]
MONSANTO COMPANY VS. CORAMANDAL INDAG PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA NEW DELHI VS. DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
NIKI TASHA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. FARIDABAD GAS GADGETS PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
HANSRAJ BAJAJ VS. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK LTD [REFERRED TO]
JOKAI ASSAM TEA CO LTD VS. BHAWANI SHANKAR BAGARIA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

STANDIPACK PRIVATE LIMITED VS. OSWAL TRADING COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-1999-5-103] [REFERRED TO]
ACME TELE POWER LIMITED VS. SINTEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED [LAWS(ALL)-2008-6-25] [REFERRED TO]
NOVARTIS AG VS. ADARSH PHARMA [LAWS(MAD)-2004-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
LOW HEAT DRIERS P LTD VS. BIJU GEORGE [LAWS(KER)-2010-5-29] [REFERRED TO]
MARIAPPAN VS. A R SAFIULLAH [LAWS(MAD)-2008-6-544] [REFERRED TO]
TVS MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED VS. BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2009-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
ACME TELE POWER LTD VS. SINTEX INDUSTRIES LTD [LAWS(UTN)-2008-6-4] [REFERRED TO]
MERCK SHARP AND DOHME CORPORATION VS. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS [LAWS(DLH)-2015-3-183] [REFERRED TO]
GALATEA LTD VS. DIYORA AND BHANDERI CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-2018-3-129] [REFERRED TO]
ASTRAZENECA AB VS. TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ; MICRO LABS LIMITED ; ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD. & ANR ; ERIS LIFESCIENCES LTD. ; USV PVT. LTD. ; MSN LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-17] [REFERRED TO]
MITA ASHOK KAPOOR VS. RAJ COOLING SYSTEM PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(GJH)-2021-10-395] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This hearing arises out of an application for temporary injunction filed on behalf of the plaintiff. In the suit the plaintiff prays for leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, and assignees etc. from in any way in fringing or attempting to infringe Patent No.170171 of the plaintiff; Decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents etc. from in any way manufacturing, selling or offering for sale or advertising any toilet soap bearing the Trade Mark 'VIGIL' or any other trade mark and having the composition that is covered under and/or within the range of Patent No. 170171 of the plaintiff. Delivery upon oath of all toilet soaps already manufactured and in possession, power and custody of the defendant No. 1 and/or the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 and/or their agents and servants that in any way infringe and/or have been manufactured in accordance with the Patent No. 170171 of the plaintiff and marked under the trade mark 'VIGIL' or any other trade mark etc. etc., a Decree directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account in respect of the infringed soaps manufactured by the defendant No. 1 and sold by the defendants that are in accordance with the Patent No. 170171; a Decree for Rs.10,00,00,000/- and in the alternative, an enquiry into the loss and damage suffered by the plaintiff and decree for the amount found due upon such enquiry etc. etc.
(2.)The petitioner/company is engaged in the manufacture of various kinds of soaps, detergents, cleaning preparations, chemicals, fertilisers, etc. and is a leading manufacturer in this country, of soaps and detergent and their products are sold under different brands and enjoys considerable goodwill and reputation. The respondent No. 1 also carries on business of manufacture of various brands of soaps and detergent and is one of the competitors of the plaintiff-company. The respondent 9 No. 2 is a Company which has been incorporated recently and is a collaboration of two Companies, i.e., respondent No. 1 and Proctor and Gamble India Ltd. which is a subsidiary of an American Company having its Headquarters in U.S.A. The respondent No. 3 is one of the distributors of the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 for sale of their products in an around the city of Calcutta. The plaintiff/ petitioner holds and owns more than one hundred and seventy active Patents granted by the Government of India under the Patents Act for inventions in different fields including detergents, soaps, their process of manufacture etc. etc.
(3.)On or about 21st September, 1988 the petitioner-company made two applications for Patent in respect of an invention relating to detergent bars suitable for personal bathing or fabric washing under application No. 275/BOM/88 and the improved process for preparing detergent bars suitable for personal or fabric washing under application No. 274/ BOM / 88. The said two applications were accepted for grant and the acceptances were notified in the Official Gazettes. The Patent Application No. 275/BOM/88 which was accepted under Serial No.170171 was duly granted and sealed by the Controlled after the disposal of the proceedings under Sec. 27 of the Patents Act, 1970 initiated at the instance of the defendant No. 1, before the Deputy Controller of Patents, Bombay. The respondent No. 1 filed opposition proceedings against the Patent Application No. 274/ BOM/88 accepted and published under Serial No.170480 and the opposition was pending before the Dy. Controller of Patents, Bombay. After hearing the parties the Dy. Controller of Patents, Bombay, directed the Patent Application No. 170171 to proceed to sealing and accordingly the Patent was granted and sealed on 23rd April, 1993. The petitioner has duly deposited the overdue as well as current renewal fees upon the sealing of Patent No.170171 and the Patent is at present valid and subsisting. Upon acceptance of the said application, the specification of other documents relating to the said two Patent Applications were laid upon to public and thus, all the information relating to the inventions were made open to the public.
;


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