Trademark laws allow the grant of
monopoly over a mark to its proprietor. This, however is subject to
certain conditions, such as, initiating a timely action against
infringers, if the proprietor sleeps over its rights, the case may
be hit by the doctrine of laches; similarly if the proprietor of a
mark allows such infringement (being aware of the infringer) then
it will amount to acquiescence.
The facts of Essel Propack Ltd.
v Essel Kitchenware Ltd. are rather interesting; it started as
a usual case of a Plaintiff claiming infringement of its trademark
rights by the Defendant, even though the Defendant was using the
mark in relation to different goods and services. As the Court
dwelled deeper into the facts, it came to the Court's knowledge
that 7 years before initiating the suit, i.e. in 2003, the
Plaintiff had sent a cease and desist notice to the Defendant.
Simultaneously, the Plaintiff had also filed an opposition to the
Defendant's trademark application. In
