Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Louis Vuitton v. Gaurav Bhatia and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (23 May 2017)

Damages have to be actual and not superfluous, Courts are not supposed to do guess work and grant damages


Intellectual Property Rights

Present suit has been filed by Plaintiff seeking permanent injunction against Defendants, restraining them from infringing its trademark, copyright and also from passing off goods of Plaintiff as that of theirs and for rendition of accounts and damages. It is submitted that, act of Defendant offering counterfeit products of Plaintiff which are identical to product of Plaintiff amounts to infringement of its trademark.

Suit has been filed by a duly authorized person. Various documents showing registration of trademark in favour of Plaintiff proves that, Plaintiff is registered owner of trademark Louis Vuitton and logo "Toile Monogram" pattern. Documents on record also conclusively show that, Defendants 1 and 2 have been indulging into supply of counterfeit products of Plaintiff and for that purpose, two FIRs have already been registered. Fact that, they were arrested and remained in judicial custody clearly proves that, Defendants have infringed trademark of plaintiff and also copyright which vest in Plaintiff and is also indulging into business of passing off counterfeit goods as that of Plaintiffs.

There is no doubt that, Plaintiff is entitled for damages because Defendants have infringed his trademark and copyright and has been selling counterfeit products of Plaintiff and has, therefore, caused losses not only in goodwill and reputation, but also financial. However, there is no evidence on record to ascertain actual damages suffered by Plaintiff. Courts are not supposed to do guess work and grant damages for losses suffered by Plaintiff. Damages have to be actual and not superfluous.

Defendants, their partners, officers, servants, agents, distributors, stockists and representatives from manufacturing, selling and offering for sale, advertising, are restrained from directly or indirectly dealing in wallets, handbags, suitcases, luggage, purses, belts, footwear, jewellery or any other goods bearing the plaintiffs trademark "Louis Vuitton" or logo or the "Toile Monogram" pattern. Defendants are also restrained from using the domain name and directed to remove the said website from ISP. Defendants are also directed to render accounts of profit earned by them. However, no damages are granted.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved