Mr. Rohra with his complain Complainant Satish Rohra, a resident of Idgah Hills, Bhopal, filed a complaint against the pet...
Issues….      The Carton of the tooth paste bears the statement that it    stops "bad breath" and "fights tooth decay" an...
Continued…..     The descriptions were pertaining to standard of quality and the    petitioners wrongly claimed their pro...
Facts To Be Considered Whether compensation by way of damages can be  adequate remedy. Whether balance of convenience li...
Final Decisions  After hearing all the parties and after examination of such  witnesses the commission by order direct tha...
The case of colgate law
The case of colgate law
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The case of colgate law

260 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
260
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The case of colgate law

  1. 1. Mr. Rohra with his complain Complainant Satish Rohra, a resident of Idgah Hills, Bhopal, filed a complaint against the petitioner- Company, its officers and Directors contending that the petitioner-Company is the manufacturer of the Colgate Dental Cream.
  2. 2. Issues…. The Carton of the tooth paste bears the statement that it stops "bad breath" and "fights tooth decay" and that the product is a non-fluoridated foaming tooth paste, whereas it is a well known scientific fact that among all the inorganic ingredients of tooth paste the only substance that may play a role in fighting tooth decay prevention of cavities is flouride.
  3. 3. Continued….. The descriptions were pertaining to standard of quality and the petitioners wrongly claimed their product to behave in a manner in which it was incapable of performing. Complainant claimed that the aforesaid description was false and misleading and the said false trade description had been deliberately applied with common intent to increase sales of the tooth paste. He averred that all the accused were financially benefiting from the sale of these illicit products. Thus, the non-petitioner/complainant prayed that the petitioners be punished for the commission of offences under the provisions of Sections 78 and 79 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 and under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
  4. 4. Facts To Be Considered Whether compensation by way of damages can be adequate remedy. Whether balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the injunction. Whether there are chances of success of the plaintiff in the case. Whether non-issue of injunction will result in irreparable loss to plaintiff.
  5. 5. Final Decisions After hearing all the parties and after examination of such witnesses the commission by order direct that: The practice shall be discontinued or shall not be repeated. The agreement relating thereto shall be void in respect of such restrictive trade practice or shall stand modified in respect thereof in such manner as may be specified in the order.

×