- 1 - 6.s.1220.10 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 122O OF 2010 Tilaknagar Industries Ltd. ..Plaintiff -Versus- Advaith Biotech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ..Defendants .......... Mr.Hiren Kamod a/w. Ms.Mushraff Bukhari i/b Himanshu W. Kane for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 28TH JULY 2011. P.C. 1 This is an action for infringement and passing off. 2 The plaintiff is a registered proprietor of the word mark ‘COURRIER NAPOLEON’. The registration is with effect from 19th February 1988 and use was claimed since 1st April 1986. The registration is under class 33 in respect of portable liquors (spiritous). 3 The plaintiff furnished the sales figures which had increased enormously over the years. The sales in the year 1999-2000 were - 2 - 6.s.1220.10 Rs.81,96,100/-. They increased over the years. In the year 2009-10 the sales increased to Rs.17,58,39,374/-. Similarly, the publicity and sales promotional expenses increased during the corresponding years from Rs. 76,15.00 to Rs.610,430. 4 The defendants are absent. There is no written statement. The plaintiff has examined one Dr.Keshab Nandy, its Chief Legal Officer & HR and Chief Vigilance Officer and authorized signatory by filing his affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief in 28th June 2011. The witness has apart from repeating and reiterating the statements furnished the necessary details in respect of the sales and promotional expenses. The defendants were absent. Hence there was no cross-examination. The plaintiff has also tendered various documents which are taken on record and marked ‘A’ collectively. 5 There is nothing on record that belies the averments and submissions in the plaint. 6 The plaintiff has established its reputation and good will in the mark. The plaintiff has established that the mark is registered. The plaintiff has, therefore, established a case of infringement and passing off. - 3 - 6.s.1220.10 7 The plaintiff claimed nominal damages of Rs.1,00,000/-. An adverse inference is justified to the effect that the defendants have deliberately not appeared and produced their record as if they had done so the same would have established that the plaintiff had suffered damages at least to the extent claimed. 8 In the circumstances, the suit is decreed in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c), (d) and (h). Prayer (d) shall be complied with within four weeks of being served with a copy of this order. Costs to be quantified as per rules. -