In a unique turn of events, the Supreme Court witnessed an unusual demonstration involving two whiskey bottles during a hearing on a trademark violation case. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra, presided over this intriguing case.
Also read-Don’t Make All Issues Prestigious Issue: Supreme Court To Delhi LG (lawchakra.in)
The case in question involved a dispute between two liquor manufacturers, Pernod Ricard and JK Enterprises, based in Indore. Pernod Ricard had appealed against a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that allowed JK Enterprises to continue manufacturing beverages under the ‘London Pride’ name. Pernod Ricard’s contention was that JK Enterprises’ use of the ‘London Pride’ mark infringed upon their ‘Blenders Pride’ trademark and the appearance of their ‘Imperial Blue’ bottle.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing one of the parties, requested permission from the bench to bring the products into the courtroom to demonstrate the similarity between the two. Upon approval, Rohatgi placed two liquor bottles on his table, leading to a light-hearted moment in the court. Chief Justice Chandrachud, surprised by the sight, humorously remarked,
“You brought bottles with you?”
To which Rohatgi affirmed, explaining the need to show the similarity between the products for his argument on trademark violation.
Chief Justice Chandrachud noted the issue’s focus on the trade dress, mentioning his judgment in Bombay that involved the shape of the bottle. The bench then issued a notice and stayed the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, scheduling the next hearing for two weeks later.
After the notice was issued, Rohatgi inquired if he could take the bottles with him, to which the CJI responded with a smile,
“Yes, please.”
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had previously rejected Pernod Ricard’s plea for a temporary injunction against JK Enterprises. The High Court reasoned that the products of the two brands cater to premium or ultra-premium whiskey consumers, who are educated and discerning. The bench had observed,
“It can be safely presumed with a sufficient deal of certainty that the consumers of such products would be mostly literate and have reasonable intelligence to distinguish between the bottles of Blenders Pride/Imperial Blue and those of London Pride.”
This case highlights the complexities involved in trademark disputes, especially in industries where branding and product presentation play a crucial role. The Supreme Court’s intervention in this matter underscores the importance of intellectual property rights and the need for careful adjudication in cases where brand identity and consumer perception are at stake.
Also read-Women Should Not Be Subordinated In Marriage: Justice BV Nagarathna (lawchakra.in)
