Poems and a verse from the Bhagavad Gita: How a Delhi Court dealt with a trademark infringement case

A Delhi Court recently quoted a couple of poems and a verse from the Bhagavad Gita in a judgment on trademark infringement and passing off wherein TTK, known for manufacturing kitchen appliances, dragged an online retail platform to court for selling its products without consent [TTK Prestige Ltd v. Hiveloop Technology Private Ltd]..TTK informed District Judge (Commercial Court) Man Mohan Sharma that it got into agreements or contracts with its respective dealers and distributors as per which the sale of any of its products through any online or e-commerce mode was not allowed without its prior written consent.It alleged that the defendant was selling TTK's products without its consent, resulting in trademark infringement and passing off. .The Court, while deciding why it was inclined to decide the issue at hand without ordering for a trial, observed that it has a duty to show an exit door to litigation without following the entire ritual of trial if the same could be done within the four corners of the law to curtail “dockets explosion”.To illustrate the need of passing a summary judgment, the Court found resonance in a poem by American writer and poet Shel Silverstein. The first few lines of the entire poem mentioned in the judgment, read,.“Sarah Cynthia Sylvia StoutWould not take the garbage out! She'd scour the pots and scrape the pans,Candy the yams and spice the hams,And though her daddy would scream and shout,She simply would not take the garbage out...”.Calling a summary judgment an effective tool for deciding cases where trial was unnecessary, the Court underscored that the precious time of the courts could be utilised fruitfully by focusing on the areas of actual dispute.It pointed out that the right to get a summary judgment can be claimed by any of the parties to a commercial dispute and this window is not open all the time. In the present case, it was the defendant that had sought a summary judgment..In order to demonstrate why during the consideration of a case or a claim for summary judgment it is required to weigh and evaluate a host of factors, the Court referred to verse 17, Chapter 4 of the Bhagavad Gita, which reads,“कररणण हपप बणदवयय , बणदवयय च पवकररण:|अकररणशच बणदवयय गहनन कर रणण गपत:||”..It explained,“Logic for an action must be known, so also the logic for inaction and that the logic for a prohibited action must also be known, therefore the practice of ‘karma’ is profound.”.The defendant had earlier contested TTK's claims, contending that such online sales and offers for sale did not constitute a valid cause of action against it for the reason that there was no privity of contract with the company.It stated that when TTK puts its products in the distribution chain, the title of the products under the trademark Prestige and its logo passes immediately to the distributors or dealers and no liability can be fastened upon any third party..When it came to deciding on this issue, the Court explained, “Various rights and obligations defined in various agreements between the plaintiff and its distributors/dealers are enforceable between the parties to the agreement inter-se only and cannot bind any third person or the world at large.""The liability on the defendants can either be fastened by virtue of a contract or by virtue of the operation of the law. Of course, there being no express or ostensible privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendants, a contractual obligation of the defendants does not arise,” it added..Further, the judgment noted that the plaintiff had no real prospect of succeeding on the claim of inducement of breach of contract. Thus, there was no compelling reason for the claim to proceed to trial.“Any oral evidence, which the plaintiff is contemplating of leading, would only be a superfluous exercise. No evidence, which is contrary to the pleadings can be allowed to be adduced. Thus, contemplating that by some iota of evidence the tables may turn is nothing but a wishful thinking without any legal basis. If the argument of plaintiff on this count is accepted it would lead to a situation which has explained by Ogden Nash, in his poem ‘One Times One Is Eight’,” it pointed out..The American poet was quoted as saying,“Either old magic or new mathInto our house has beat a path.How else could Einstein or DiogenesExplain an exploit of our progeny's?While at the table with his ilkA child upsets a glass of milk.The glass held half a pint when filled,And half a gallon when it spilled.”.The Court, therefore, allowed the application for summary judgment and dismissed TTK's claim of trademark infringement. It also separately framed the issues, while keeping the hearing for January, 2022 ..[Read Order]