It is a settled principle that the Plaintiff must come to the court with clean hands and no material facts should be concealed. Recently, the Delhi High Court has set aside an ex-parte interim injunction order in a trademark infringement and passing off case filed by Paramount Surgimed Limited (hereinafter referred as 'the Plaintiff') against Paramount Bed India Private Limited (hereinafter referred as 'the Defendant'). The centre of dispute is the use of the trademark PARAMOUNT for hospital beds. In the instant suit, it was pleaded by the Plaintiff that the word PARAMOUNT was first adopted in the year 1993 as part of its corporate name and it has been engaged in manufacturing and supplying intensive care hospital beds in India. The Plaintiff also obtained the trademark registration for PARAMOUNT label under class 10 (surgical, medical, dental etc.) as well as in class 20 (furniture, mirrors, picture frames etc.) and its first registration dated back to January 14, 2000. Based on registration and prior use in India, the Plaintiff has claimed to be the lawful owner of the trademark/name PARAMOUNT. The suit was filed in the year 2017 averring that the Plaintiff learnt about the presence of the Defendant's use of an identical trademark PARAMOUNT only in February of 2017. Initially, an ex-parte order had been passed whereby the Defendant was restrained from using the mark PARAMOUNT.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
