The Bombay High Court, on August 13, 2024, presided over by Justice R.I. Chagla, ruled in favor of Pidilite Industries Ltd. in a contempt petition against Premier Stationery Industries Pvt. Ltd. and associated parties. The case revolves around the willful disobedience of the court's final order from July 13, 2017, which was based on consent terms between the parties. Pidilite alleged that the respondents continued to use labels, trade dress, and packaging that infringed on its well-known FEVICOL MR trademarks and copyrights, despite agreeing to cease such actions.

The respondents argued that they had sold their business and were no longer involved in manufacturing or selling the disputed products. However, the court found these claims unsubstantiated, noting the close relationship between the parties and their continued business activities from the same address. The court concluded that the respondents were jointly and severally liable for contempt, imposing a fine of ₹50 lakhs and granting Pidilite extensive injunctive relief to prevent further violations.

1. Background and Parties Involved

• Petitioner: Pidilite Industries Ltd., a globally recognized leader in adhesives, sealants, and construction chemicals.
• Respondents: Premier Stationery Industries Pvt. Ltd., and associated individuals, including family members involved in the business.

2. The Dispute

• The case originates from a commercial suit filed by Pidilite in 2017, alleging trademark and copyright infringement by the respondents.
• The court had passed a final order based on consent terms, which the respondents later violated by continuing to use similar labels and trade dress.

3. Allegations of Contempt

• Pidilite claimed the respondents breached the consent terms by manufacturing and selling products that infringed on Pidilite's FEVICOL MR trademarks.
• The respondents' defense of having sold their business was found to be false and misleading by the court.

4. Court's Findings

• The court found the respondents' actions to be in willful and deliberate disobedience of its orders.
• The court also held that the close relationship between the parties and their business activities indicated a sham sale intended to evade liability.

5. Penalties and Injunctions

• The court imposed a fine of ₹50 lakhs on the respondents, payable within four weeks.
• It also granted Pidilite permanent injunctions, restraining the respondents from using the disputed labels and packaging.

6. Conclusion

• The court emphasized the need for strict compliance with its orders and the severe consequences of contempt, setting a precedent for upholding intellectual property rights.