Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 APRIL 2007

Damages - Court Adopts Subjective Standards

The objective of awarding damages is to put back the plaintiff in the original position. The aim of awarding punitive damage is to punish the defendant for the wrong done. It is interesting to observe the parameters laid down by the Court in awarding damages.

IndiaIntellectual Property

The objective of awarding damages is to put back the plaintiff in the original position. The aim of awarding punitive damage is to punish the defendant for the wrong done. It is interesting to observe the parameters laid down by the Court in awarding damages. In Microsoft case, the Delhi High court placed stringent measures to tackle copyright infringement. But the Delhi High Court in Prestige Housewares Ltd v. Dinesh Gupta & Anr. 2007 (34) PTC 335 (Del.) was reluctant to award punitive damage as there was no claim for the same in the plaint.

Facts of the case

Prestige Housewares Ltd. claims to be the manufactures of pressure cookers and other various products under TTK Group of Companies. The trademark PRESTIGE was registered in favour of Prestige Group Ltd, UK in 1949 which was later on assigned to Prestige Housewares Ltd. Apart from the pressure cookers, Prestige Housewares Ltd also undertook the marketing of parts of the pressure cookers such as gasket, seals, metallic safety

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from