A single judge bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh on October 19 granted a permanent injunction in favour of Aero Club-plaintiff, a proprietor of the ‘WOODLAND’ mark and its variants, marketed and sold by them against a wholesaler of belts and wallets based in Sadar Bazar here.
With respect to the relief of damages and “rendition of accounts”, the HC directed the trader to pay Rs 5 lakh to the plaintiff within three months.
On December 21, 2021, the complainant was granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction against two traders from Sadar Bazar restraining them from manufacturing, selling and advertising “in any manner bearing the registered trademarks ‘Woodland’ (word mark), the ‘Tree Device’ and the ‘Woodland Label’ or any similar trademark amounting to an infringement of the plaintiff’s registered trademarks, as also passing off of their goods as emanating from the plaintiff”. The traders are M/s. Bhawna Belt Co.- defendant no. 1 and M/s. Gun Gun Belt House-defendant no. 2.
On March 29, the high court had referred the plaintiff and the second trader to mediation under the aegis of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The parties had resolved the dispute in terms of a settlement agreement in September, according to which the trader had acknowledged the plaintiff’s rights and ownership in the impugned marks.
“The Defendant No.2 is also willing to suffer a permanent injunction restraining the use of the impugned marks, as also, the original artistic work of the plaintiff. The settlement agreement further records that all the products bearing the impugned marks, seized by the Local Commissioner, were handed over to the plaintiff,” the September order stated. Additionally, the second trader even paid damages of Rs 70,000 to the complainant.
After the interim order in December, a local commissioner was appointed to visit the premises of the first trader who seized 34 products bearing the ‘Woodland’ mark from his premises. The court noted that the trader had complete knowledge of the proceedings before the high court and yet did not appear before the court in the matter.
Proceeding “ex-parte” against the first trader, the high court referred to the report of the local commissioner which said that the first trader was involved in the “sale of counterfeit WOODLAND products”. The court then permanently restrained the businessman from manufacturing and selling counterfeit products of ‘WOODLAND’.
