Court puts stop to follow on Dedigama Pawning Centre

Dedigama Group Ltd., pioneers in the pawn brokering and gold loan industry, recently obtained an interim injunction from the Commercial High Court of Colombo against D.A.C.P. Dedigama Pawning Centre Ltd. 

Dedigama Group Ltd. pleaded that D.A.C.P. Dedigama Pawning Centre’s conduct of using the name “Dadigama Pawning Centre” which is confusingly and/or misleadingly similar to the Plaintiff’s registered trademark “Dedigama” and more particularly to the trade names “Dedigama Pawning Centre”, “Dedigama Gold Loan Centre” and “Dedigama Pawn Brokers” and using the Sinhala translation as “දැඩිගම උකස් මධ්‍යස්ථානය” which is identical to the Plaintiff’s tradename has infringed the intellectual property rights of the Dedigama Group Ltd. and done by the Defendant in an failed attempt of passing off on the goodwill and reputation of Dedigama Group Ltd.

Dedigama Group Ltd. has become the most trusted Gold House and Pawn Broker in Sri Lanka offering their customers a wide and varied range of services with high levels of integrity, quality and craftsmanship, and has grown as Sri Lanka’s largest Pawn Brokering network with operations dispersed among 281 branches all across Sri Lanka. The name “Dedigama” has become a household name in Sri Lanka, and it is uniquely associated with the business of Dedigama Group Ltd.

Dedigama Group Ltd. further pleaded that the continuous conduct of D.A.C.P. Dedigama Pawning Centre in commencing new outlets and carrying out promotional and advertising using trade dress and a get up in a confusingly similar and/or identical manner have gravely prejudiced their interests and results in a violation of its rights guaranteed under the Intellectual Property Act No. 36 of 2003. 

After considering the submissions made by both parties, Colombo Commercial High Court Judge K.P. Fernando issued interim injunctions against the Defendant D.A.C.P. Dedigama Pawning Centre Ltd. restraining the Defendant from continuing to engage in the pawn brokering and/or jewellery business and from advertising or promoting and/or commencing any new place of business, stall or shop in respect of its pawn brokering and/or jewellery business, using a trade name that contains the word ‘‘Dadigama” and/ or දැඩිගම, and/or any other mark, sign or name which is visually and/or phonetically confusingly resembling the signage and trade dress of Dedigama Group Ltd. 

The Plaintiff, Dedigama Group Ltd., was represented in Court by Manoj Bandara, Nathaya Nanayakkara, Lakshani Perera and Chamathka De Silva instructed by Sudath Perera Associates. The Defendant, D.A.C.P. Dedigama Pawning Centre Ltd., was represented in Court by President’s Counsel Kuvera De Zoysa instructed by Ama Sandamini.