1 s1499-02 vai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.1499 OF 2002 Societe des Produits Nestle, S.A. & Anr. ....Plaintiffs V/s. Makson Confectionery Works & Ors. ....Defendants Mr.Hiren Kamod i/b Mr.H.W. Kane for the Plaintiffs. Mr.J.S. Chandnani for Defendant Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 18TH JULY, 2011. P.C. :- 1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of defendant Nos. 1 to 3 makes a statement that defendant Nos.1 to 3 have stopped using the impugned marks “MUCCH” and “KIR KET & KIT KIT”. He further makes a statement that defendant Nos.1 to 3 shall not hereafter use the said mark or any marks deceptively similar to the plaintiffs’ mark ‘KIT KAT” and “MUNCH”. The statements are accepted. 2. The learned counsel for defendant Nos.1 to 3 further states that defendant Nos.1 to 3 will not infringe the plaintiffs’ copyright being the artistic work on the wrapper Exhibits “B”, “B-1” and “M”. The statement is accepted. 4. Defendant Nos.4 to 6 are also alleged to be the stockists 2 s1499-02 and manufacturers. They have used the marks similar to the impugned marks and have also infringed the plaintiffs’ copyright. 5. There can be no doubt that the impugned mark is deceptively similar visually and phonetically to the plaintiffs’ mark “KIT KAT” and the two marks are written in the same stylized manner. This is also the case of the defendant’s mark “MUCCH”. The plaintiffs’ mark “KIT KAT” is registered. In addition thereto, the plaintiffs have established the reputation in respect of both the marks, as is evident from the sales figures. There is nothing on record that belies the same. 6. In the circumstances, the suit is decreed in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e). The other prayers are not pressed.