Karnataka High Court

Dilip Kumar Jain vs Taffy Appliances Private Limited on 5 June, 2023

Bench: H T Prasad

                                              -1-
                                                     NC: 2023:KHC:19009
                                                        MFA No. 2278 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2278 OF 2023 (IPR)
                   BETWEEN:

                   DILIP KUMAR JAIN
                   ALIAS DILIP KUMAR RANAWAT
                   AN INDIAN, HINDU
                   AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
                   S/O LATE SRI MAGRAJ RANAWAT
                   GALA NO 7, TOPAZ INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
                   SATIVALI ROAD
                   WALIV VILLAGE
                   VASAI (E) PALHAR-401208
                                                                 ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. SIVARAMAN VAIDYANATHAN.,ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    TAFFY APPLIANCES PRIVATE LIMITED
Digitally signed         AN INDIAN COMPANY INCORPORATED
by
DHANALAKSHMI             UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
MURTHY                   CIN: U29300MH2000PTC124261
Location: High
Court of                 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
Karnataka                MR RATAN SAKARIA, GALA NO 5
                         SAHNTI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
                         CHINCHOTI KAMAN ROAD
                         VILLAGE-SAPADA
                         VASI (EAST) PALHAR-401208.

                   2.    SRI PRAKASH ELECTRICAL AND SPARES
                         CONSTITUTION NOT KNOWN TO PLAINTIFF
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR/PARTNER
                         NO 130/10, B V K IYENGAR ROAD
                                -2-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC:19009
                                         MFA No. 2278 of 2023




     (NEXT TO USHA TRADING CO.)
     BENALURU 560053.


                                               ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. DEEPAKAR LIVINGSTON
AND FREUD RICHARDSON .,ADVOCATES FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O DATED: 05.06.2023)



      THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) R/W
SECTION      151   OF   CPC,   AGAINST   THE   ORDER   DATED
31.03.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NOS.2 AND 3 IN OS.NO.2211/2023
ON THE FILE OF THE        XVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE,
CCH-10,      BENGALURU,    ISSUING   EMERGENT    NOTICE   TO
DEFENDANTS FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W
SECTION 151 OF CPC.

      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

This appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the CPC is

filed by the plaintiff challenging the order dated 31.3.2023

passed by the XVIII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore in

O.S.No.2211/2023 whereby the Trial Court has refused to

grant an order of exparte temporary injunction to the

plaintiff.

NC: 2023:KHC:19009 MFA No. 2278 of 2023

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed the suit for permanent

injunction before the Trial Court seeking for the following

reliefs:

WHEREFORE the Plaintiff most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a judgment and decree in terms of and by granting:

(a) An order and decree of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants and their dealers, agents, servants, employees, legal heirs, successors, assignees, representatives, associates, and anybody claiming through or under them, jointly and severally, from passing off the Plaintiff's goodwill and reputation in and to the trademarks MI SUMEET and DUJANA by using the identical and deceptively similar trademarks SUMEET and/or DUJANA and/or any other identical and/or deceptively/confusingly similar trademark in relation to the goods for which the Plaintiff's trademarks MI SUMEET and DUJANA is used namely mixer grinders or any other allied and cognate goods; and

NC: 2023:KHC:19009 MFA No. 2278 of 2023

(b) An order and decree of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants and their dealers, agents, servants, employees, legal heirs, successors, assignees, representatives, associates, and anybody claiming through or under them, jointly and severally, from Infringing the Plaintiff's registered trademark Nos. 1892486 and 5358408 both in class 07 for the marks MI SUMEET and DUJANA respectively by using the identical and deceptively similar trademarks SUMEET and/or DUJANA and/or any other identical and/or deceptively/confusingly similar trademark relation to the goods for which the Plaintiff's trademarks stand registered namely mixer grinders or any other allied and cognate goods; and

(c) An order and decree of mandatory injunction directing the Defendants to surrender to the Plaintiff on oath for destruction all packaging materials, products, pouches, labels, cartons, boxes, containers, dies, printing blocks, stationery, invoices, drawings, engravings, brochures, product literature, seals, sales promotional material or other documents or material, whether in physical form or digital/electronic form bearing the identical and deceptively similar trademarks SUMEET and/or DUJANA or any other identical and/or deceptively/confusingly similar trademark; and

NC: 2023:KHC:19009 MFA No. 2278 of 2023

(d) An order and decree directing the Defendants to render a true and faithful account of the complete sales turnover generated by the Defendants from the sales of products under the offending and infringing marks SUMEET and/or DUJANA, and the Defendants be further directed to pay the complete sales turnover to the Plaintiff; and

(e) An order and decree directing the Defendants to pay the costs of this suit, and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass such further order(s) and grant such other relief(s) to the Plaintiff as it may deem fit and proper under the circumstances;

All in the interests of justice and equity.

4. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff also filed

applications under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC seeking

an order of temporary injunction. The plaintiff had also

sought for an order of exparte temporary injunction. The

Trial Court by impugned order dated 31.3.2023 has issued

suit summons to the defendants returnable by 20.4.2023

and has refused to grant an order of temporary injunction.

NC: 2023:KHC:19009 MFA No. 2278 of 2023

Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has filed this

appeal.

5. This Court by order dated 19.4.2023 has passed

the following order:

"Heard.

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the appeal and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court refusing grant of temporary injunction is an unreasoned, cryptic and laconic order passed without application of mind and no proper or cogent reasons are assigned as to why the appellant-plaintiff was not entitled to an ad-interim exparte order of temporary injunction. It is also submitted that though the Trial Court directed issuance of suit summons and notice returnable by 20.04.2023, the respondents- defendants have not been served with notice of the suit so far.

The said submission is placed on record. Issue emergent notice to the respondents returnable by 05.06.2023.

In the meanwhile, the respondents and any persons claiming through or under them are

NC: 2023:KHC:19009 MFA No. 2278 of 2023

restrained from using the plaintiff's registered trade mark "MI SUMEET and DUJANA" for the purpose of marketing or selling their products, goods etc., till the next date of hearing.