The Delhi High Court held that a plain reading of the plaint clearly indicates that the principal grievance articulated by the plaintiff in its plaint which has occasioned the filing of the instant suit, is use of a trademark and label which is claimed to be a deceptively similar trademark and label of the plaintiff. There is no averment in the entire plaint from paragraphs nos. 1 to 25 which would indicate that the plaintiff apprehended the use of the trade mark in question in future; on the contrary the averments articulate the plaintiff's grievance regarding the use of the trademark by the defendant. Further, a mere bald statement at the end of the plaint which has no foundation in the entire plaint cannot be accepted as indicating the cause of action; the averments made in the plaint must, ex-facie, disclose the cause of action. Thus, the contention that part of cause of action has arisen within the territories of the Court since the plaintiff has made a bald statement that it apprehends that the defendant would launch its product in Delhi, cannot be accepted.
As such, the instant application was allowed and the plaint was liable to be returned.
06-Jan-2017 read more