M/S. M. Appliance Ltd. vs Joginder Singh
1994 Latest Caselaw 466 Del

JUDGMENT

P. K. Bahri, J.

1. The office to register this application. This is an application under Order 6 Rule 17 for amendment of the plaint with a view to incorporate a plea that this Hon'ble Court has territorial jurisdiction as defendants are residing as well as carrying on business at Delhi. The application is formal and has been moved even before any section is taken in the suit. I allow this application.

S. No. 1476/94 and I.A.

2. Suit be registered. Summons in suit and notice in the application be issued to the defendant. Counsel for defendant accept the summons and the notice. Copies of the plaint, application and annexure have already been supplied to the counsel for defendant. The written statement and reply to the application be filed within 10 days. Replication and rejoinder within 10 days thereafter. Adjourned to 7th November, 1994.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to decide whether an ex-parte injunction should be granted in favor of the plaintiff in this case or not. The plaintiff has a registered trade mark under the name and style of 'MITASO'. The defendant has started marketing his similar type of goods under the trade mark 'META SHOW'. The two words, on the face of it, are deceptively similar phonetically. Any ordinary customer could be easily misled in treating the goods of one as coming from the source of another.

4. The counsel for defendant has brought to my notice a judgment of Single Bench of this court in case of Smt. Kala Devi v. Parley Export Pvt. Ltd. (I.A. 7510/91 in Suit No. 1763/91). I have persued the said judgment I am of the firm view that anything said in that judgment would not apply to the facts of the present case. One of the main point which waived with the courts was also that in that case the plaintiff/applicant had not become exclusive owner of the trade mark and there was no trade mark registered in favor of the plaintiff in that case.

5. I find that in two cases filed by the plaintiff, interim injunction have already been granted against the defendants of those cases who have started using deceptively similar trade mark in breach of the registered trade mark of the plaintiff. I grant ex-parte injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade mark 'META-SHOW' or any other deceptively similar trade mark which may infringe the registered trade mark of the plaintiff till further orders.