The AIADMK has sought an injunction from the Madras High Court restraining Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam (AMMK) leader T.T.V. Dhinakaran from exploiting the personality rights of former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa by using the epithet Amma in his party’s name and her portrait on its flag.
The ruling party had filed a civil suit to injunct Mr. Dhinakaran from using a flag “deceptively similar” to that of the AIADMK. Now, it has decided to amend its prayer.
When the suit came up for hearing before Justice N. Sathish Kumar on Wednesday, the plaintiff’s counsel, M.V. Swaroop, told the court that he had already served a rejoinder to Mr. Dhinakaran’s counter affidavit on the latter’s counsel, N. Raja Senthoorpandian.
He said he required a few weeks’ time to amend the plaint in view of several other developments that had taken place pursuant to the filing of the suit last month. After recording his submissions, the judge granted him time till June 4.
During the course of the arguments, when the judge sought to know whether the case was related to infringement of a trademark, Mr. Swaroop said that it was about passing off a mark and not a trademark in strict sense.
Immediately, Senior Counsel P.S. Raman, appearing on behalf of Mr. Dhinakaran, quipped: “ In a lighter vein, I may say that if your lordship holds that politics is nothing but business, then possibly there might be some case for the plaintiff to argue, otherwise there is no case.”
Misappropriation claim
In the rejoinder, AIADMK joint co-ordinator and Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami claimed that Mr. Dhinakaran was attempting to “misapproriate this identity” by claiming to be her [Jayalalithaa’s] political successor.
He contended that the epithet Amma had become synonymous with Jayalalithaa since the AIADMK members had been using the term of endearment for decades together to refer to her. Only the AIADMK had the right to use her persona in the political sphere and to claim her legacy, since it was the AIADMK cadre who had built the Amma name and image over several years, he said.
AIADMK’s Joint Coordinator and Chief Minister ‘Edappadi’ K. Palaniswami denied Mr. Dhinakaran’s contention that a Dravidian party or an off-shoot of a Dravidian party could never monopolise the colours red and black used widely in their flags. The CM accused the defendant of attempting to “fraudulently misappropriate” the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff party by using the unique combination of black, red and white colours in the AMMK’s flag.
“The defendant’s use of the term Amma in the name of his political outfit or the use of the bust of Dr. J. Jayalalithaa (on the AMMK’s flag) is nothing more than a dishonest representation that he represents the legacy of the plaintiff party’s eternal general secretary,” he said.
Top Seithigal
The ruling party had filed a civil suit to injunct Mr. Dhinakaran from using a flag “deceptively similar” to that of the AIADMK. Now, it has decided to amend its prayer.
When the suit came up for hearing before Justice N. Sathish Kumar on Wednesday, the plaintiff’s counsel, M.V. Swaroop, told the court that he had already served a rejoinder to Mr. Dhinakaran’s counter affidavit on the latter’s counsel, N. Raja Senthoorpandian.
He said he required a few weeks’ time to amend the plaint in view of several other developments that had taken place pursuant to the filing of the suit last month. After recording his submissions, the judge granted him time till June 4.
During the course of the arguments, when the judge sought to know whether the case was related to infringement of a trademark, Mr. Swaroop said that it was about passing off a mark and not a trademark in strict sense.
Immediately, Senior Counsel P.S. Raman, appearing on behalf of Mr. Dhinakaran, quipped: “ In a lighter vein, I may say that if your lordship holds that politics is nothing but business, then possibly there might be some case for the plaintiff to argue, otherwise there is no case.”
Misappropriation claim
In the rejoinder, AIADMK joint co-ordinator and Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami claimed that Mr. Dhinakaran was attempting to “misapproriate this identity” by claiming to be her [Jayalalithaa’s] political successor.
He contended that the epithet Amma had become synonymous with Jayalalithaa since the AIADMK members had been using the term of endearment for decades together to refer to her. Only the AIADMK had the right to use her persona in the political sphere and to claim her legacy, since it was the AIADMK cadre who had built the Amma name and image over several years, he said.
AIADMK’s Joint Coordinator and Chief Minister ‘Edappadi’ K. Palaniswami denied Mr. Dhinakaran’s contention that a Dravidian party or an off-shoot of a Dravidian party could never monopolise the colours red and black used widely in their flags. The CM accused the defendant of attempting to “fraudulently misappropriate” the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff party by using the unique combination of black, red and white colours in the AMMK’s flag.
“The defendant’s use of the term Amma in the name of his political outfit or the use of the bust of Dr. J. Jayalalithaa (on the AMMK’s flag) is nothing more than a dishonest representation that he represents the legacy of the plaintiff party’s eternal general secretary,” he said.
Top Seithigal
Comments
Post a Comment