Lata Pharma And 3 ORS v. Max Nutraciticals And 3 ORS

1/2 15.CONP-71-2017.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.71 OF 2017 IN SUIT NO.733 OF 2015 Lata Pharma and Ors.

....Petitioners Vs.

Max Nutraciticals Firm and Ors.

....Respondents ---- Ms. Jeenal Upadhyay i/b. Ms. Meghana M. Kadam for petitioners. Mr. Virendra T. Dubey for respondents.

---- CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J.

DATE : 19th JUNE 2019 P.C.:

On 29th July 2015 defendants had appeared and submitted to a decree. Ms. Upadhyay, counsel for petitioners states that as per the order dated 29th July 2015, where the suit was decreed in terms of prayer clauses - (a), (b) and (c), defendants could not have used the impugned mark MVBC-L or MCVC or any other mark which is deceptively similar to the mark MVBC-L. Ms. Upadhyay states that subsequently petitioners learnt that respondents are using the marks which are at Exhibit M, N and O to petition. According to petitioners, the marks in these three exhibits are deceptively similar to petitioners' marks. I am not for a moment opining whether those marks are deceptively similar. If it is so, petitioners have a cause of action in which petitioners will have to file a suit. That cannot be decided in contempt jurisdiction.

Gauri Gaekwad

2/2 15.CONP-71-2017.doc Petition dismissed.

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gauri Gaekwad