Case Note & Summary
This judgment arises from an interim application in a commercial IP suit filed by Hindustan Unilever Ltd against an opposing party. The court had already made an ex parte ad-interim order granting an injunction and appointing a Receiver, with directions not to upload the order until the Receiver executed his commission. The present order addresses a procedural question of form and substance that commonly arises in trademark infringement and passing off actions. The court observed that plaintiffs typically cast separate prayers for relief in infringement and passing off, but both seek only one thing: an injunction against the defendant from using the impugned mark, label, or artistic work. The court held that this practice is incorrect and may be counter-productive. It explained that there is no one-to-one correspondence between a cause of action and relief; a single cause of action can yield multiple prayers, and multiple causes of action can be coalesced into a single prayer. In infringement and passing off, the relief is simply an injunction, and it is inconceivable that a defendant would be under an injunction not to infringe but be at liberty to pass off, or vice versa. The correct form is to seek a single injunction, regardless of whether it is grounded in infringement or passing off. The court further clarified that a cause of action is a bundle of facts that a plaintiff must prove to obtain relief, citing the Supreme Court's definition in Abraham Ajit v. Inspector of Police, (2004) 8 SCC 100. The court directed that henceforth, in such suits, a single prayer for injunction should be used.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Pleading Practice - Cause of Action vs. Relief - No one-to-one correspondence between cause of action and relief; multiple causes of action can be coalesced into a single prayer - In trademark infringement and passing off suits, the relief is simply an injunction; separate prayers for infringement and passing off are incorrect and counter-productive - Held that a single prayer for injunction is sufficient, regardless of whether grounded in infringement or passing off (Paras 2-4). B) Civil Procedure - Cause of Action - Definition - Cause of action is a bundle of facts which, if traversed, a plaintiff must prove to obtain relief - It is not evidence nor the relief sought - The Supreme Court in Abraham Ajit v. Inspector of Police, (2004) 8 SCC 100, defined cause of action as every fact necessary to be proved to support the right to judgment (Para 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether separate prayers for relief in trademark infringement and passing off are required, or whether a single injunction prayer suffices
Final Decision
The court held that a single prayer for injunction is sufficient in trademark infringement and passing off suits, regardless of whether grounded in infringement or passing off. The court directed that henceforth, in such suits, a single prayer for injunction should be used.
Law Points
- Cause of action is a bundle of facts
- not relief
- no one-to-one correspondence between cause of action and relief
- multiple causes of action can coalesce into a single prayer
- separate prayers for infringement and passing off are unnecessary and counter-productive
