The case between the Coca-Cola Company and Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. and Others is a landmark judgment in the history of IPR in India. It is very popularly also called the ‘Maaza War’. As this name suggests the dispute was over the rights of the trademark of the brand name ‘Maaza’. The Coco-Cola Company (TCCC) had entered into an agreement wherein Bisleri would manufacture the product ‘Maaza’ and agreed to not disclose the secret ingredients and formula used in the manufacturing process. However, it was found by TCCC that Bisleri had allowed third party companies such as Verma International and M/s. Indian Canning Industries and then had been selling the products in Turkey via Aqua Minerals.

Facts

A company, known as Aqua Minerals Pvt. Ltd, which was a part of Parle Group of Industries sold the trademarks, formulation rights, intellectual property rights, etc. of ‘Thums Up’, ‘Limca’, ‘Gold Spot’ and ‘Maaza’ to TCCC in September 1993. Bisleri was in an agreement with Aqua Minerals and had the secret beverage base for manufacturing Maaza. TCCC was given the rights to sell the products in India and not all over the world. Aqua Minerals retained the trademark rights of Maaza in other nations where it had been registered. When Coca-Cola tried to apply for registration of the trademark of Maaza in Turkey, it was blocked by Aqua Minerals and a legal notice was issued in that regards. TCCC sought a permanent injunction against Aqua Minerals and compensation for infringement of copyrights and trademark.

Issues

Whether Delhi High Court had jurisdiction to hear and decide upon a certain matter? If there was any infringement of the trademark or copyrights? If Verma International was a party to the case? If TCCC was entitled to a permanent injunction against Aqua Minerals?

Held

The Court found that Delhi High Court had territorial jurisdiction over the matter. Upon investigation, it was found that Verma International was exporting the product to Australia. The Court also held that there was an infringement of trademark as the product was manufactured in India and then exported abroad and in export, it is considered to be a sale made in the nation, thus making Verma International a party to the case. The Court further upheld the injunction against Verma International to prevent it from making any further sales and costing TCCC a lot of money. However, the appeal against Bisleri was quashed whereby the Court allowed Bisleri to manufacture the product in India and then export the stock to the nations wherein Aqua Minerals had the rights over the trademark of Maaza.

Conclusion

Bisleri was not held accountable for manufacturing and exporting the product. However, they were also not held accountable for sharing the secret ingredients to Verma International due to lack of proof whereas there seems a strong possibility that Bisleri may have sold the secret beverage base to Verma International. The Court also held Verma International accountable for infringement of trademarks and forbid them from manufacturing and exporting the product of TCCC abroad illegally. The judgment laid the groundwork for many similar judgments where the same manufacturers can provide products to different companies who have rights over the same products in different nations.