HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED Vs J A COSMETICS AND 4 ORS.

10-ial-18642-2023.
doc
jsn
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally
JITENDRA
SHANKAR
signed by
JITENDRA
SHANKAR
NIJASURE
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NIJASURE Date:
2024.08.03
16:30:52
+0530 IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.18642 OF 2023

IN
COM IPR SUIT (L) NO.18482 OF 2023
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. …Applicant /

Plaintiff
Versus
J.A. Cosmetic and Ors. …Defendants
----------
Hiren Kamod, Niyati Davawala, Anil Shete and Simran Khan for the
Plaintiff.
Charushila Vaidya, 2nd Asstt. To Court Receiver is present.
K.S. Prindavankar, ASO to Court Receiver is present.
----------
CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA J.
DATE : 1ST AUGUST, 2024
ORDER :
1. Mr. Hiren Kamod the learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant / Plaintiff has tendered the Affidavit of Service dated 30th
July, 2024 which shows service on the Defendants of the Orders
dated 24th June, 2024, 5th July, 2024 and 16th July, 2024 passed by
this Court. The Affidavit of Service is taken on record.
1/6
::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

10-ial-18642-2023.doc
2. By the order dated 24th June, 2024, this Court had
noted that by the Order dated 5th July, 2024, ad-interim relief had
been granted in terms of the prayer for passing of namely prayer
Clause (c) in addition to the ad-interim which has been granted by
the exparte 17th July, 2023 in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and
(d). Further, inspite of service on the Defendants, none appeared. A
last chance was given to the Defendant to remain present on the next
date, when the Interim Application was placed for hearing.
3. Today, the matter has come for hearing. The Defendants
inspite of service have failed to remain present.
4. It appears that the Defendants have no answer to the
case made out by the Plaintiff, in respect of which exparte ad-interim
orders dated 17th July, 2023 and 5th July, 2024 were passed.
5. Having considered the findings in the said exparte ad-
interim order, the impugned trade mark of the Defendants is nothing
but a counterfeit of the Plaintiff’s product as borne out from the
comparison in paragraph 10 of the said Order and the observations
made in paragraph 11 thereof, the ad-interim relief granted in favour
2/6

10-ial-18642-2023.doc
of the Plaintiff requires to be confirmed and the Interim Application
disposed of accordingly.
6. Thus, the Plaintiff has been able to make out a strong
prima facie case for grant of interim relief and the Defendants cannot
be allowed to use the counterfeit packagings and trade dresses for
their products, particularly, considering that the Defendants’ use the
same logos, marks and artistic works to vend counterfeit and illicit
products. The balance of convenience is clearly in favour of the
Plaintiff. Further, irreparable prejudice will be caused if the relief is
denied.
7. The Interim Application is granted in terms of prayer
Clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d), which read thus:-
a) pending the hearing and final disposal of the

suit, the Defendants by themselves, their
proprietor/partners, servants, agents, distributors,
dealers, assignees, stockists and all those connected
with the Defendants in their business be restrained
by an order and temporary injunction of this
Hon’ble Court from manufacturing, printing,
packaging, laminating, distributing, supplying
and/or using in any manner whatsoever in relation
to cosmetic preparations the impugned counterfeit
marks i) HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED
3/6

10-ial-18642-2023.doc
registered under No. 1656815, HUL registered

under No. 2584259; ii) LAKME registered under
Nos. 604703, 782606, 631532, 874356, 1330997,
1537007, 1678791, 1706559, 1745477, 2168392,
2618511, 2618613, 2740511, 2946833, 2947708,
3218639, 3406848, and 3707467; iii) LAKME
EYECONIC registered under No. 2227603, LAKME
EYECONIC (label) registered under No. 4460688,
EYECONIC (label) registered under No. 4460670;
(iv) LAKME NINE TO FIVE registered under Nos.
1706560 and 2548745 and (v) L – Logo registered
under no. 2188731 and L-Logo with Lakme
registered under no. 2188730 all in class 03
respectively so as to infringe upon the Plaintiff’s
aforesaid registered trade marks all in class 03
respectively;
b) pending the hearing and final disposal of the

suit, the Defendants by themselves, their
proprietor/partners, servants, agents, distributors,
dealers, assignees, stockists and all those connected
with the Defendants in their business be restrained
by an order and temporary injunction of this
Hon’ble Court from manufacturing and/or trading,
marketing, importing, distributing, selling and/or
using in any manner whatsoever in relation
cosmetic preparations, the pirated / impugned
artistic works of LAKME NINE to FIVE (9 to 5) and
LAKME EYECONIC kajal label/ packaging
(appended at Exhibits I-1 and I-2 respectively to the
plaint) bearing colour scheme, lay-out, get-up,
style, artwork, trade dress and representation or
any other artwork/s which is/are identical with
and/or is/are substantially/strikingly similar to the
Plaintiffs’ original artistic works of LAKME NINE TO
FIVE (9 to 5) cosmetic range and LAKME
EYECONIC kajal preparation (appended at Exhibits
C-5 and D-6 respectively to the plaint), so as to
infringe upon the Plaintiff’s subsisting copyrights in
the original artistic works for the aforesaid
products;
4/6

10-ial-18642-2023.doc
(c) pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit,

the Defendants by themselves, their proprietor /
partners, servants, agents, distributors, dealers,
assignees, stockists and all those connected with the
Defendants in their business be restrained by an order
and temporary injunction of this Hon'ble Court from
manufacturing and/or trading, marketing, importing,
distributing, selling and/or using in any manner
whatsoever in relation to any cosmetic preparations,
the impugned counterfeit marks and the pirated
impugned artistic or any mark/s or artistic works
/trade dress identical with and/or deceptively similar
to the Plaintiff's distinctive and prior used registered
trademarks i.e. the HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED,
HUL, LAKME, LAKME NINE TO FIVE (9-5), LAKME
EYECONIC, LAKME EYECONIC (label), EYECONIC
(label) and L-Logo / L-Logo with Lakme, and the
Plaintiff's subsisting copyrights/trade dresses in the
Plaintiffs' original artistic works of LAKME NINE TO
FIVE (9 to 5) and LAKME EYECONIC so as to pass off
their goods and business as and for those of the
Plaintiffs; or in some way connected or associated
therewith.
d) pending the hearing and final disposal of this

suit, the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, or
such other fit and proper person/s as this Hon’ble
Court thinks fit, be appointed Receiver/s with all
powers under Order XL Rule 1 and Order XXXIX
Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to
attend and search the premises, shops, retail
outlets, offices, factories, godowns, warehouses of
the Defendants and shall also visit locations of such
person/s, firm/s, entity/ies in Aizawl, Mizoram and
such other places, as may be pointed out by the
representatives of Plaintiff during this search and
seizure and even thereafter from time to time, till
the next date of hearing and other premises
wherever the infringing goods bearing the
impugned counterfeit marks and pirated artworks
5/6

10-ial-18642-2023.doc
and any other like goods as may be found, stocked,

sealed or are lying and to break open locks of such
premises with the help of police protection (if
needed), at day or at night, make an inventory,
seize and take possession/custody thereof by
sealing the said goods and the moment the goods
are seized by the Court Receiver, the order of
injunction would operate upon such person/s being
unknown to the Plaintiff at present, who would
then be impleaded as party Defendants to the
present proceedings and the Court Receiver shall
hand over possession of such seized goods to the
Plaintiffs on superdari who would keep such
inventory of seized goods at their premises under
lock and key and also of all related items such as
carton boxes, labels, stationery, production
registers, invoices, printing and packaging
materials, screens, cylinders, blocks, moulds, dyes,
stencils, machinery and master plates used
manufacture the counterfeit goods lying at the
premises, offices or factories, manufacturing units,
godowns, warehouses of the Defendants or their
agents or at any other place/s and the Defendants
by themselves, their servants, employees,
representatives be ordered to deliver up all the
aforesaid to the Court Receiver or to such other fit
and proper person as Hon’ble Court thinks fit and
the Court Receiver must carry out such search and
seizure with local police assistance, if necessary, at
no costs;
8. The Interim Application is disposed of accordingly. There
shall be no order as to costs.
[ R.I. CHAGLA J. ]
6/6

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED Vs J A COSMETICS AND 4 ORS.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED Vs J A COSMETICS AND 4 ORS.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED Vs J A COSMETICS AND 4 ORS.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10-ial-18642-2023.

INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.18642 OF 2023

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. …Applicant /

J.A. Cosmetic and Ors. …Defendants

CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA J.

DATE : 1ST AUGUST, 2024

1. Mr. Hiren Kamod the learned Counsel appearing for the

Applicant / Plaintiff has tendered the Affidavit of Service dated 30th

July, 2024 which shows service on the Defendants of the Orders

this Court. The Affidavit of Service is taken on record.

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

2. By the order dated 24th June, 2024, this Court had

been granted in terms of the prayer for passing of namely prayer

Clause (c) in addition to the ad-interim which has been granted by

(d). Further, inspite of service on the Defendants, none appeared. A

date, when the Interim Application was placed for hearing.

3. Today, the matter has come for hearing. The Defendants

inspite of service have failed to remain present.

4. It appears that the Defendants have no answer to the

case made out by the Plaintiff, in respect of which exparte ad-interim

5. Having considered the findings in the said exparte ad-

interim order, the impugned trade mark of the Defendants is nothing

but a counterfeit of the Plaintiff’s product as borne out from the

comparison in paragraph 10 of the said Order and the observations

made in paragraph 11 thereof, the ad-interim relief granted in favour

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

of the Plaintiff requires to be confirmed and the Interim Application

6. Thus, the Plaintiff has been able to make out a strong

be allowed to use the counterfeit packagings and trade dresses for

their products, particularly, considering that the Defendants’ use the

products. The balance of convenience is clearly in favour of the

Plaintiff. Further, irreparable prejudice will be caused if the relief is

7. The Interim Application is granted in terms of prayer

Clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d), which read thus:-

a) pending the hearing and final disposal of the

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

registered under No. 1656815, HUL registered

b) pending the hearing and final disposal of the

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

(c) pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit,

d) pending the hearing and final disposal of this

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

and any other like goods as may be found, stocked,

8. The Interim Application is disposed of accordingly. There

shall be no order as to costs.

::: Uploaded on - 03/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 06/08/2024 12:01:00 :::

You might also like