Supreme Court Rebukes RBI for Remaining a Bystander as YES Bank Operated Clandestinely  ||  Supreme Court: Lower Fresh Bids Alone Cannot Justify Cancellation of an Auction  ||  Supreme Court Directs Delhi Police to Produce Section 163 BNSS Orders and Preserve CCTV Footage  ||  Supreme Court Affirms Menstrual Hygiene as a Fundamental Right, Warns States of Contempt  ||  Supreme Court Flags AI-Generated Fake Judgments Submitted in a Party’s Case Compilation  ||  Karnataka High Court: Vijay Mallya’s Flamboyant Lifestyle Hinders Settlement of Bank Claims  ||  Delhi High Court: Women can be Booked for Gang Rape without Physically Committing it  ||  Delhi High Court: Litigants Must Track Their Cases and Cannot Blame Lawyers for Their Own Inaction  ||  Allahabad High Court: Contract Workers Must Prove Work Parity With Regular Staff for Equal Pay  ||  Allahabad High Court Directs UP Trial Courts to Decide Maintenance Execution Cases Within Six Months    

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

MANU/DE/3332/2018

Civil

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.

Tags : INFRINGEMENT   INJUNCTION   GRANT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved