Delhi HC: Difference in Layout is of No Consequence if Essential Feature of Trademark Infringed  ||  Allahabad HC: Parliament has Responsibility to Restrain Criminals from Entering Into Politics  ||  Delhi HC Refuses to Vacate Stay on Direction to Enforce CM's Speech Promising Rent Relief  ||  J&K&L HC: Judges Must Refrain from Making Derogatory Remarks Against Parties  ||  Delhi HC: Courts Should be Sensitive When Poor And Deprived Knock at its Doors  ||  CESTAT: Law Does Not Mandate Customs Broker to Physically Verify Address of Client  ||  Orissa HC: Appeal Can’t be Dismissed on Sole Ground of Non-Submission of Certified Order  ||  ITAT: Deposit of Banned Notes Received Out of Cash Sales During Demonetization Period is Valid  ||  ITAT: Arrangement Between Spouse Without Real Money Exchange Not Amount to Unexplained Investment  ||  ITAT: 100% Deduction U/S 80IC of IT Act allowable when Industry undergone Substantial Expansion    

Sandisk LLC and Ors. Vs. Memory World - (High Court of Delhi) (12 Sep 2018)

Court is empowered to pass a summary judgment, without recording evidence, if it appears that Defendants have no real prospect of defending the claim



Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark, rendition of accounts, damages etc. against the defendant. Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that, the Defendant has infringed upon the statutory rights of the Plaintiffs by copying each and every element of the Plaintiffs' product and/or product packaging, with the sole intent of duping unwary customers by selling counterfeit products and to ride on the Plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill. Further, since the plaintiffs' product comes pre-packaged, there is no occasion for genuine loose packaging to be available in the market, which therefore establishes the counterfeit nature of the defendant's product packaging.

Order XIII-A of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 empowers present Court to pass a summary judgment, without recording evidence, if it appears that the Defendants have no real prospect of defending the claim and there is no other compelling reason why claim should not be disposed of.

In the opinion of present Court, the Defendant has no real prospect of defending the claim and no other compelling reason appears to this Court why claim of the Plaintiffs should not be disposed of. This is so because the Defendant has not filed its written statement despite entering appearance on 27th April, 2018, nor denied the documents of the Plaintiffs. Moreover, as the Defendant is selling counterfeit products bearing the plaintiffs' SanDisk trademark and product packaging, it is a clear case of infringement of the Plaintiffs' registered trademark.

The Defendant is using the registered trade mark SANDISK of the Plaintiffs and its product packaging to sell counterfeit products with a view to trade upon and benefit from the immense reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiffs' mark and pass off its products as those of the Plaintiffs. The suit is decreed in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2022 - All Rights Reserved