A second time this month, two whiskey bottles were produced before the Chief Justice of India at the Supreme Court, during a hearing related to the trademark violation row between two liquor companies.
The two bottles were first produced before the top court on January 5, when a three-judge bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud was hearing an appeal against the Madhya Pradesh High Court order that rejected liquor company Pernod Ricard's appeal to prevent an Indore-based company, JK Enterprises, from manufacturing beverages under the 'London Pride' name.
Pernod Ricard, which owns the 'Blenders Pride' and 'Imperial Blue' brands, has also accused JK Enterprises of violating its trademark and dressing up the 'London Pride' whiskey bottles like theirs.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Pernod Ricard, argued that the respondent (JK Enterprises) had copied several contents of Blenders Pride.
Senior advocate S Muralidhar, appearing for JK Enterprises, countered by saying that the kind of bottle being referred to is available across the country, to which, senior advocate AM Singhvi, also for Pernod Ricard, pointed out two forms of violation.
He argued that while Blenders Pride's name was copied to London Pride, its get-up was copied from Imperial Blue. Rohatgi added that the style and colour combination had been copied as well.
Meanwhile, the Chief Justice of India observed there was no absolute similarity with regard to the names of Blenders Pride and London Pride.
"You used the word 'blender', they use the word 'London', and the bottles are also different. They are also saying 42 other manufacturers also use the word. Blender and London are two completely different words," the Chief Justice of India said.
Agreeing with the CJI, the counsel for JK Enterprises argued that while the Blenders Pride was worth Rs 1,650, the London Pride cost around Rs 600. Therefore, someone willing to buy a Blenders Pride would never buy a bottle of London Pride, he said.
Countering the respondent, Singhvi said just because they did not sue 20 others who had copied the names of their bottles, did not mean they cannot sue them.
Further, the court asked JK Enterprises as to why they copied the same appearance and colour for their whiskey bottles.
"Why did you adopt the same blue colour, trade dress etc. you use the same trade dress virtually, change that," the CJI said.
Senior advocate Muralidhar then agreed to then take the instructions, adding that he would also ask if the label on the whiskey bottles could be changed.
