The legal battle over the alleged infringement of whisky manufacturers’ trademarks saw an unexpected scene in the Supreme Court, when liquor bottles were put before the country’s top court.
Leading alcohol company Pernod Ricard India Pvt Ltd, which produces and markets the whiskies ‘Blenders Pride’ and ‘Imperial Blue’, was presenting a case before a bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud in opposition to the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision from last November.
PERNOD RICHARD PETITION
Pernod Ricard had petitioned the high court to overturn an Indore commercial court ruling that had denied their request for an interim injunction.
The company claimed that its trademark was being violated. The company informed the high court that they have a registered trademark for ‘Blenders Pride’ and ‘Imperial Blue’, in addition to a registered trademark for Seagram’s, their house mark that is used on goods marketed under other names.
It contended that JK Enterprises was copying its trademark and producing and distributing its whisky under the London Pride brand.
The high court rejected Pernod Ricard’s appeal, ruling that the trial court had not erred in concluding that there was no similarity between the mark of JK Enterprises and Pernod Ricard’s trademark. The matter was scheduled for hearing before the Supreme Court on Friday.
During the hearing, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Pernod Ricard, showed the whisky bottles to the bench. He told the bench, also comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, that even the bottle is identical.
“Issue notice on the prayer for stay as well as on the Special Leave Petition returnable on January 19, 2023,” the bench said in its order.
BATTLE OVER ‘PRIDE’
Pernod Ricard had argued before the high court that ‘Pride’ was the most essential and distinctive component of their mark ‘Blenders Pride’ which they have been using since 1995.
The firm had said they were also using another mark ‘Imperial Blue’ since 1997 and are selling whisky under the same in distinctive labels, packaging, and trade dress.
“The plaintiffs (Pernod Ricard) acquired knowledge that the defendant is selling London Pride whisky which is deceptively similar to its Blenders Pride trademark. The whisky of the defendant is being sold by putting label, using packaging, getup and trade dress deceptively similar to Imperial Blue,” the high court had noted in its verdict.
The other side had said they were manufacturing and selling liquor under the brand name of ‘London Pride’ in Madhya Pradesh and the trademark ‘London Pride’ was entirely different in name, style, and composition from any of the earlier registered trademarks.
The counsel appearing for the other side had argued before the high court that the overall comparison of the trademarks unmistakably showed that there was no similarity in them which may cause confusion in the mind of a consumer while purchasing the whisky.
(with PTI inputs)
Comments
0 comment