2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
