In a recent Judgement pronounced by Hon'ble Single Judge, of Delhi in
Amrish Aggarwal Vs Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd.: 2019 SCC OnLine Del
9966, general direction has been issued by the Hon'ble Court that while filing
Suit for Trademark infringement, the Plaintiff is required to file Legal
Proceeding Certificate.
From bare perusal of the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Single Judge, High Court
of Delhi, it is apparent that no penal consequences have been provided. What
could be effect of Non filing of Legal Proceeding Certificate in a Suit for
Infringement, was yet to be adjudicated.
The Hon'ble Division Bench , high court of Delhi was having an occasion to deal
with inter-alia this issue in Judgement dated 12.09.2022 passed in Appeal
bearing FAO(COMM) 78 of 2022, titled as Maan Pharmaceuticals Vs Mindwave
Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
Coming to the facts of the case, this Appeal was filed by the Defendant against
order order dated 07.12.2021 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial
Court-02), Saket Courts - South District, New Delhi whereby the application
filed by the appellant (defendant) under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 of Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter 'the CPC'), was dismissed.
The Hon'ble Division Bench, after observing that the Respondent was having sales
office at Neb Sarai, within the jurisdiction of Court. The the order of the
Trial Court to effect of favoring the Jurisdiction of the Court was held to be
correct.
The Respondent also pleaded that the Appellant have intention to come within
territorial jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Court. The Appellant is all set to
launch its product within jurisdiction. The Appellant sought rejection of the
plaint on the ground that mere apprehension of sale of goods with the impugned
trademark in the future, will not amount to cause of action.
However the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi rejected this argument by observing that
in view of the settled law , there is no merit in the objection taken by the
Appellant that an apprehension to sell the goods with impugned trademark in
future will not confer a cause of action in favour of Respondent.
The factum of non mentioning of rectification petition filed by the Appellant
was also held not to be material suppression as It is settled law that filing of
a rectification petition does not take away the right of a registered proprietor
to injunct the infringement of its trademark. The pendency of the rectification
does not create any bar for grant of interim injunction. Hence this argument was
also rejected.
Now comes to the question of non compliance of general direction issued by the
Hon'ble Single Judge , Delhi High Court in Judgement reported as
Amrish
Aggarwal Vs Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd.: 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9966. The
appellant argued regard to non-filing of the Legal Proceedings Certificate in a
Suit for infringement. The said plea has been taken on the strength of the
decision passed by a Single Bench of this Court in the case of Amrish Aggarwal
Vs Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd.
In order to appreciate this argument of the Appellant, the relevant portion of
said general direction issued by the Hon'ble Single Judge , Delhi High Court in
Judgement reported as
Amrish Aggarwal Vs Venus Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd.:
2019 SCC OnLine Del 9966 are reproduced as under:
"It is further directed that in trade mark infringement matters the following
documents ought to be necessarily filed along with the plaint:
i. Legal Proceedings certificate (LPC) of the trade mark showing the mark, date
of application, date of user claimed, conditions and disclaimers if any,
assignments and licences granted, renewals etc.,
ii. If the LPC is not available, at the time of filing of the suit and urgent
orders of injunction are being sought, a copy of the trade mark registration
certificate, copy of the trade mark journal along with the latest status report
from the website of the Trade Mark Registry. This should be accompanied by an
averment in the pleadings that LPC is applied for. Specific averment ought to be
made that there are no disclaimers imposed on the mark and the mark stands
renewed. Any licences and assignments ought to be pleaded"
Said Judgement does not prescribe for penal consequences in case of non
compliance of afore mentioned direction. The Hon'ble Division Bench, High Court
of Delhi rejected by observing that though a Legal Proceedings Certificate is an
important document, which should be placed before the court at the time of
deciding preliminary applications, the same, however, will not take away the
statutory right of a plaintiff to seek injunction, which it is otherwise
entitled to.
The Hon'ble Division Bench reasoned that in
Amrish Aggarwal Vs Venus Home
Appliances Pvt. Ltd.: 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9966, the Hon'ble Single Judge had
passed certain directions in order to deter frivolous litigations and for the
purpose that the time of the courts is not wasted due to non-filing of relevant
documents. It was felt that a Legal Proceedings Certificate is an important
document, which should be placed before the Court at the time of deciding
preliminary applications.
The Hon'ble Division Bench also observed that there is no such requirement in
the statute that a suit for infringement will not be entertained, if not
accompanied by a Legal Proceedings Certificate. Thus it is clear that in a Suit
for infringement, though a Plaintiff is supposed to file Legal Proceeding
Certificate of its Trade Mark, however non compliance does not necessarily take
away the right of plaintiff to seek injunction.
Case Law Discussed:
Maan Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs Mindwave Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
Judgement Date:12.09.2022
Case No. FAO(COMM) 78 of 2022
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi
Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan , H.J
Maan Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs Mindwave Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
Written By: Ajay Amitabh Suman, IPR Advocate, Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi.
[email protected], 9990389539
Please Drop Your Comments