Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T) is a company engaged in business in the field of technology, engineering, construction, and manufacturing. It was founded in Mumbai in 1938 by 2 Danish engineers, Henning Holck­Larsen and Soren Kristina Toubro. It has been using the wordmarks Larsen & Toubro and L & T in relation to its various goods and businesses since 1938. It is the registered proprietor of various L&T trademarks. 

General Industrial Controls Private Limited (GIC) is the registered proprietor of the trademark “GIC” in class 9 in relation to electromechanical control for electronic goods such as time switches. It also owns the copyright in the artwork of its label used for the said products. GIC manufactures the abovementioned products and L&T markets them. Therefore, the labeling and packaging of the products distinctly bear the names of GIC and L&T respectively. 

L&T and GIC alleged that Radheshyam Singh and Pradeep Jain are engaged in selling, manufacturing, marketing, purveying, supplying, soliciting trade of various analog time switches, electrical and electronic goods, and other allied/related products. They have adopted and started using the trademark viz. Larsen & Toubro, Larsen, Toubro, L&T, LT, LT, LK, and GIC in relation to their goods and business along with a logo/label. 

GIC and L&T approached[1] the Patiala House District Court of Delhi seeking an injunction against Radheshyam Singh trading as R.D. Electricals and Pradeep Jain trading as Peekay Associates (“the Defendants”) restraining them from infringing the formers’ registered trademarks and copyright. 

The trademarks adopted and being used by the Defendants are identical with and deceptively similar to those of L&T and GIC in each and every respect including phonetically, visually, structurally, in its basic idea, and in its essential features. 

L&T and GIC further claimed that the Defendants have also copied the artistic features involved in L&T and GIC's trademarks and are thus, infringing their copyrights in its said labels. The Defendants are using all kinds of false descriptions on their goods to wrongly link their goods with L&T and GIC and to convey to the public and customers that the goods emanate from L&T and GIC. 

L&T and GIC claimed that the Defendants have no right to use these labels. They stated that the Defendants are violating L&T and GIC’s trademarks and are passing off their goods and business as those of L&T and GIC as well as diluting L&T and GIC proprietary rights therein. They also claimed that apart from sales to direct customers, the Defendants are supplying the goods bearing the identical trademark to dealers/ retailers/ distributors in New Delhi.

The Defendants did not appear before the Court and the matter proceeded ex-parte.

The Court held that since L&T and GIC are the registered proprietors of the impugned trademarks and the mark used by the Defendants is deceptively identical, it amounts to infringement and passing off.

Hence the Court granted an injunction restraining the Defendants from using the trademarks 'Larsen & Toubro, L&T, LT, LT, LK and GIC and/or any other mark deceptively/ confusingly/ phonetically similar to these trademarks. The Court further considered the fact that the Defendants deliberately avoided contesting the matter, hence it granted L&T and GIC damages of INR 1,00,000/­-