Page 15 - Banking Finance July 2017

LEGAL UPDATE

Property buyer cannot ONGC wins arbitration appeal
The Bombay High Court has set aside the arbitral award in the dispute between
claim damages ONGC and Interocean Shipping (India). ONGC had given

a contract to the shipping company for maintenance of
its vessels. Disputes arose over payment and the arbi-
tration tribunal accepted 2:1 the claims of the shipping
company against which ONGC moved the high court. It
said the majority finding rendered by the tribunal that
there was no breach of agreed procedure was “totally perverse and patently
illegal”. The court stated that there was not only breach of agreed procedure
but also violation of natural justice and principles of evidence. Moreover, the
The Calcutta High Court stated last procedure was modified without the consent of ONGC. The shipping company
week that if work on the Metro Rail- had produced 11 volumes of documents, the authenticity of which was disputed
way causes any damage or injury to by ONGC. But the tribunal dispensed with proof of such documents. Since arbi-
any land or building, it is the person tration was going on for some 18 years, the records of banks regarding payments
having subsisting interest in such land were also not available.
or building at the relevant time who Infrastructure in labour courts
can claim compensation from the
Metro Railway Authority. The Bombay High Court last week passed a series of directions to provide infra-
structure facilities to labour and industrial courts in Maharashtra on a petition
A person who bought the property moved by the Federation of Labour Law Practitioners Association. The govern-
from the original owner cannot claim ment shall provide adequate space in the court rooms, sitting arrangements,
compensation. The case arose when basic facilities such as water, toilet and continuous power supply. All posts of
a multi-storey building on judges should be filled and they shall be provided quarters. The courts should be
shifted to the government’s own buildings within five years and till then the land-
Chittaranjan Avenue was damaged
lords should be told to provide adequate facilities in the existing rented build-
while constructing the Metro Rail-
ings. The high court had earlier in the month passed a 210-page judgment on
way. The original owner filed a claim
the overall conditions of subordinate courts in the state. All the directions in that
for damages and it was pending. judgment will be applicable to the labour/industrial courts also.
Later the property was purchased by
a firm. Long delay defeats trademark suit
If two pharmaceutical products with identical formulations and similar trade dress
It wanted to stand in the shoes of the
have remained in the market for a long time, the
original owner and claim damages.
court would be slow to pass an injunction against
The competent authority allowed it the company alleged to be passing off the goods.
stating that any person interested in The Bombay High Court stated so in the case, Tor-
the property can claim damages, rent Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Wockhardt Ltd. Both
whether original or proposed. The companies manufactured medicines for sprains,
original owner might have received fractures and respiratory infections. Torrent’s prod-
a low consideration and the new one uct was called Chymoral and that of Wockhadt, Chymotral. Torrent accused
might have spent money on the re- Wockhardt of passing off products with similar names. The latter contended that
construction of the property. the product was in the market for a long time and Torrent did not complain.
Agreeing with it, the high court stated that since the rival products have co-
The Metro Railway moved the high existed for a long time, it could not be said there was misrepresentation with
court in appeal against it. It reversed intent to deceive the public, especially when the products were advertised and
the ruling in the judgment, Union of subsequently registered. It cannot be assumed that they would cause confusion
India vs SAF Builders Ltd observing in the mind of the buyers. “It is one thing to speak of a consumer of average
that a claim for damages cannot be intelligence and imperfect recollection; it is another to take him for a fool. That
is not the law’s demand,” the court said while rejecting the application for in-
assigned to another party.
junction.

BANKING FINANCE | JULY | 2017 | 15

Sashi Publications Pvt Ltd Call 8443808873/ 8232083010