AGL 38.20 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.13%)
AIRLINK 129.30 Increased By ▲ 4.23 (3.38%)
BOP 7.85 Increased By ▲ 1.00 (14.6%)
CNERGY 4.66 Increased By ▲ 0.21 (4.72%)
DCL 8.35 Increased By ▲ 0.44 (5.56%)
DFML 38.86 Increased By ▲ 1.52 (4.07%)
DGKC 82.20 Increased By ▲ 4.43 (5.7%)
FCCL 33.64 Increased By ▲ 3.06 (10.01%)
FFBL 75.75 Increased By ▲ 6.89 (10.01%)
FFL 12.83 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (8.18%)
HUBC 110.72 Increased By ▲ 6.22 (5.95%)
HUMNL 14.03 Increased By ▲ 0.54 (4%)
KEL 5.22 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (12.26%)
KOSM 7.69 Increased By ▲ 0.52 (7.25%)
MLCF 40.08 Increased By ▲ 3.64 (9.99%)
NBP 72.51 Increased By ▲ 6.59 (10%)
OGDC 189.18 Increased By ▲ 9.65 (5.38%)
PAEL 25.74 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (5.36%)
PIBTL 7.38 Increased By ▲ 0.23 (3.22%)
PPL 153.45 Increased By ▲ 9.75 (6.78%)
PRL 25.52 Increased By ▲ 1.20 (4.93%)
PTC 17.92 Increased By ▲ 1.52 (9.27%)
SEARL 82.50 Increased By ▲ 3.93 (5%)
TELE 7.63 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (5.68%)
TOMCL 32.50 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (1.66%)
TPLP 8.48 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (4.31%)
TREET 16.74 Increased By ▲ 0.61 (3.78%)
TRG 56.01 Increased By ▲ 1.35 (2.47%)
UNITY 28.85 Increased By ▲ 1.35 (4.91%)
WTL 1.34 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (3.88%)
BR100 10,659 Increased By 569.2 (5.64%)
BR30 31,331 Increased By 1822.5 (6.18%)
KSE100 99,269 Increased By 4695.1 (4.96%)
KSE30 31,032 Increased By 1587.6 (5.39%)

A civil court here has returned the suit filed by a local industry M/s Afridi Beverages (Pvt) Ltd relating to manufacturing and distribution of beverages by the name of Mecca Cola.
The court returned the plaint of M/s Afridi Beverages (Pvt) Ltd versus M/s Mirage Mehra (Pvt) Ltd the other day, ruling that the civil court had no jurisdiction to deal with matter pertaining to trademark.
In its detailed order the court of civil judge Ms Sunbal Naseer observed that under the Trade Mark Law the forum for adjudication of the matter pertaining to trademark would be court.
The court also recalled the stay order earlier issued in favour of Afridi Beverages against M/s Mirage Mehra through which the latter was restrained from manufacturing and distribution of Mecca Cola here.
The plaintiff had filed the instant suit in October 2003 against M/s Mirage Mehra (Pvt) Limited with the plea that they were using the trade name of Mecca Cola since long and it was their civil right to use the name.
The plaintiff added that the defendant M/s Mirage Mehra had no authority to manufacture or distribute Mecca Cola.
The defendant contended that they were sole authorised agent of Taoufik Mathlouthi who was the original owner and author of Mecca Cola having brand name registered under Trade Mark and Copy Right Act in France, therefore the plaintiff had no right to use the name of Mecca Cola.
An application was filed by the defendant for dismissal of the suit under order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code. Barrister Adnan Saboor Rohaila appeared for M/s Mirage Mehra and contended that the plaintiff had filed the instant suit on the basis of an alleged application submitted for the registration of trade mark and copy right and the suit of the plaintiff was liable to be dismissed.
He contended that the civil court had no jurisdiction to take cognisance of the matter and only district court could adjudicate upon the matter.
Secondly, he added, the alleged trade mark had not been registered under Trade Mark Act.
He added that the alleged trademark had been registered in France on August 14, 2002 and was protected under the international laws.
He added that Taoufik Mathlouthi is a Muslim citizen of France and Mecca Cola is being produced in UAE, Morocco, France, England and Canada.
Advocates Hamid Farooq Durrani and Manzoor Hussain Butt of Lahore appeared for the plaintiff Afridi Beverages and contended that in the present suit, the question of civil right was only involved that both the parties had applied for registration of trademark and till the registration, the plaintiff had civil right to sue the name of Mecca Cola.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2004

Comments

Comments are closed.