Delhi High Court Restrains Company From Selling Jeans With Similar Stitching Design Mark Of Levis Strauss

The bench also noted that the offending manufacturer of the readymade garments was a habitual offender.

Levi Strauss & Co. is a multinational company incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, United States of America (USA), having headquarters in San Francisco, USA. Amongst the most prominent marks is the ‘Arcuate Stitching Design mark’, used on and in relation to readymade clothing, most prominently for denim jeans [ASD mark].

Accordingly, the bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula decreed the suit in favour of Plaintiff and against Defendants No. 1 to 4 in the, while observing that “The terms of the Undertakings as extracted above clearly bind the Defendants. Despite having assured and undertaken not to infringe Plaintiff’s ASD Mark, Defendants brazenly and blatantly continued to do so the same, which establishes that Defendants are habitual offenders. Therefore, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiff is entitled to decree under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), as well as in terms of Order XIIIA Rules 3 and 6(1)(a) of CPC. 22”.

Advocate Dushyant K. Mahant appeared for the petitioner and Advocate Sujoy Kumar, Raghav Kumar appeared for D-1 to 4, and Advocate Gaurav Gupta, Authorized Representative of D-5, appeared through VC.

In the present matter, the Plaintiff, pressed for a decree against Defendants No. 1 to 4 under Order VIII Rule 10 read with Order XIIIA of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

The grievance was thus that the Defendants No. 1 to 4. Defendant No. 1/ Nab Productions Private Limited is a company wherein Defendants No. 2 and 3 are the Directors and Defendant No. 4 is the ‘Head– Planning and Operations.’ alleged infringing activities of Plaintiff claims that the said Defendants manufacture readymade garments through Defendant No. 5/ JMK Hosiery, which include denim jeans bearing the ASD mark on the pockets.

In 2019, plaintiff’s Indian representative issued legal notice to Defendant No. 1 asserting their prior rights to the ASD Mark, which Defendant No. 1 responded to by indicating intention to amicably resolve the matter.

Pursuant to which, Defendant No. 1 had sent written undertakings duly executed by Defendants No. 2 and 3.

After perusing the said undertaking the bench was of the opinion that it appeared that not only the company but also the entities or persons related to the company were bound by Undertakings.

Cause Title: Levi Strauss And Co v. Nab Productions Private Limited And Ors & Ors.