The matter had been dealt upon  in the High Court of Delhi , in the case concerning ANURAG SANGHI & ANR. v M/S KNITPRO  INTERNATIONAL, wherein the petitioners  had been seeking for withdrawing the suit titled as Knitpro International Vs. Anurag Sanghi ,  wherein both the suits were pending in the Court of the ADJ-04, PHC, New Delhi to the High Court of Delhi seeking likewise to be tried along with the suit titled  as Knitpro International Vs. Anurag Sanghi & Anr. , that was a transferred case to the Court already bearing a common issue thereby facing a disposal through an order which is common to both the cases. 

The proceedings  had been instituted before  the Patiala House Court, New Delhi  while being transferred in terms of Section 22(4) of the Designs Act, 2000 to the High Court by an  order of the learned ADJ-04, PHC, New Delhi in connection to the defense resorted by the defendants contending  that the Court of the ADJ lacked jurisdiction for regarding the prayer concerning the cancelling of the plaintiff’s designs. 

The aforesaid suit  had been re-numbered as CS (COMM)867/2018 upon receipt at the present Court. 

CONTENTION RAISED BY THE PETITIONERS:

It was contended that the respondent  has alleged the piracy of its registered designs by the petitioners  while restraining the petitioners from selling LYKKE knitting needles  that had specific design features that the respondent had alleged to have imitated   from their SYMFONIE knitting needles along with violating the compromising term that had been made between the parties in a previous suit. 

Moreover, the respondents had filed two more suits  bearing similar title as M/s Knitpro International vs. Anurag Sanghi & Another (i.e. for passing off suits) where it was alleged  that cause of action regarding the passing off involved the similar knitting needles that was slimier to the suit pertaining to the design and another suit had been filed regarding  (titled as M/s Knitpro International vs. Anurag Sanghi & another) that was upon an infringements of copyright concerning the industrial drawings of the knitting needles that was a subject matter of the Designs  and passing off suit. 

Hence, it was prayed that in the interest of justice , the three likewise suits be dealt   in together by the High Court since they dealt with similar cause of action holding same facts, same parties which would in turn spare the time of the judiciary and expenses. 

CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE RESPONDENT:

It was contended by the Respondent that the cause of action in both the suits were different  in terms of seeking permanent injunction against the passing off the suit and piracy of registered designs as well as claiming action for infringing the copyright pertaining to the  product’s industrial drawings thereby bearing no similarity while the infringement suit pertaining to the design was transferred to the aforesaid Court through Section 22 (4) of the Designs Act, 2000  but no such provisions were made available under the Trademark Act and Copyright Act followed by the question of law being different for all the case and hence transferring the suits ought to be rejected.

DECISION HELD BY THE HON’BLE  DELHI HIGH COURT:

It was  held by the Court that the chart that had been submitted regarding the suits that were pending reflected that date of instituting the suit, subject matter, status and products pertaining  to the suits along with the admission of the respondent in relation to it, must be tried together.

Read Judgment here:

[embeddoc url=”https://legaldesire.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Anurag-Sanghi-Knit-Pro-11.06.2019-Anu-Malhotra.pdf” download=”all”]