Case: Khoday India Ltd Vs. Scotch Whisky Association


Decision reasoning: 1[ds]However, tests laid down in Australia and United States in respect ofgoods are noticed hereinbefore are somewhat different. But then we are concerned with the class of buyer who supposed to know the value of money, the quality and content of Scotch Whisky. They are supposed to be aware of the difference of the process of manufacture, the place of manufacture and their origin. Respondent No.3, the learned Single Judge as also the Division Bench of the High Court, therefore, failed to notice the distinction, which is real and otherwise borne out from the precedents operating in the field. [SeeKerly?s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, Thirteenth Edition pg. 600].Had these tests been applied the matter might have been different. In a given case probably we would not have interfered but we intend to do so only because wrong tests applied led to a wrong result.So far as the applicability of the 1999 Act is concerned, having regard to the provisions of Sections 20(2) and 26(2), we are of the opinion that the 1999 Act will have nodoctrine of continuing wrong has nothing to do with the refusal on the part of a statutory authority or a court of law to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction on the ground of latches, acquiescence or waiver.