Apple loses patent lawsuit to University of Wisconsin; India opposes proposed European Trademark rules
Apple loses patent lawsuit to University of Wisconsin; India opposes proposed European Trademark rules
Denies deposit-repayment extension time to Elder Pharmaceuticals; Emphasizes on investors' interest
Bombay HC dismisses appeal filed by Elder Pharma Ltd. ('Applicant Co.') against CLB's order wherein it denied granting of any further time extension u/s 58A of Cos. Act, 1956 and u/s 74 of Cos. Act, 2013 for repayment of matured deposits, directs repayment; Notes the fact that Applicant Co. was unable to repay deposits on account of financial difficulties, states that "if the Company has any defense as to its inability to pay due to consequences beyond its control, that is a matter which could be appropriately urged in a prosecution of the co. u/s (10) of Section 58A of Co. Act, 1956 or Section 74(3) of the 2013 Act, but that cannot the sole basis on which the CLB can grant any extension of time"; Rejects Applicant co.'s contention that deposits were not repaid as Court had passed an injunction order from selling co. properties in relation to winding-up petition filed by Tata Capital (who Appellant co.'s debentureholders) and an order was passed under Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, holds that "these orders merely require the company to obtain leave of the Court before selling its assets. Nothing prevented the Company from applying for such leave"; Notes that Applicant co. had relied on the term sheet executed for availing finance, observes that such sheet was not even disclosed to depositors and they were not aware of so-called lender / terms offered, holds that "Primary requirement of justice system is that document cannot be used against an opponent without giving him an opportunity to deal with it ….. it would be a travesty of justice, if this Court, were to rely on the term sheet whilst disposing of this appeal"; Notes that many depositors are small-time investors and individuals who have invested their life's savings to fund their retirements as children's education, states that "these investors cannot be asked to wait indefinitely till the company executes an agreement with a financer and the financer, in turn, brings in finance" :Bombay HC
The ruling was delivered by Justice S. C. Gupte.
Advocates Ali Abbas Delhiwala, Pooja Shetty argued on behalf of Applicant Co. while Advocates Jimmy Avasia, Purnima Awasthi, Manoj Bang and Tithe represented respondent.
Quashes Single Judge order declining jurisdiction; Sec 134 of Trademarks Act doesn't override CPC
Division Bench of Madras HC sets-aside Single Bench's order that declined its jurisdiction u/s 134 of Trademarks Act to entertain appellant's infringement/ passing-off suit; Single Judge refused its jurisdiction on the ground that appellant did not carry on business within its territorial limit; Notes that trademark infringement & trademark registry took place within the Court's jurisdiction, thus holds that there was cause of action under CPC and Single Judge had jurisdiction to entertain instant suit; Rejects respondent's contention that mere production of one bill was not sufficient to show sale and invoke jurisdiction of the Court & that provisions of Trademarks Act prevailed over CPC; Terms respondent's reliance on SC ruling in Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. vs. Sanjay Dalia & Anr as misplaced, as SC held therein that Sec 134 of Trademark Act did not override CPC provisions, and refers to Full Bench ruling in Duro Flex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Duroflex Sittings System reported:Madras HC
The ruling was delivered by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice T.S.Sivagnanam
Advocate Bharathkumar argued on behalf of Appellant while Dr. Venkat Reddy Donthi Reddy represented respondents.
LSI Note:
Section 134 of the Act empowers District Court to try infringement suits, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, at the time of the institution of the suit or other proceeding, the person instituting the suit or proceeding, or, where there are more than one such persons any of them, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain.
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment