Madras High Court
M/S. Aarthi Scans Private Limited vs Rt Diagnostics on 10 October, 2023
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.10.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
M/s. Aarthi Scans Private Limited
60, 100 Feet Road Vadapalani
Chennai 600 026 Appellant in
Rep. by its Managing Director Govindarajan. .. all OSAs.
Vs.
1. RT Diagnostics
3/23, Plot No.62, 1st Street
Rajeshwari Nagar
Karambakkam, Porur
Chennai 600 116
Rep. by its Managing Partner
Dr.S.Thiruvenkitaswamy
Also at 23, Friends Avenue
Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 116
(Appasamy Medical Center).
2. Dr.S.Thiruvenkitaswamy
Respondents in
3. T.Vijay Srinivas .. all OSAs.
__________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
Prayer: Appeals filed under Section 13(1) of Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High
Courts Act, 2015 read with Order XXXVI, Rules 1 & 9 of Original Side
Rules and Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the common order
dated 01.10.2021 made in O.A.Nos.407 to 409 of 2021 in
C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.16 of 2021 on the file of this Court.
For the Appellant : Mr.Sathish Parasaran
Senior Counsel
For Ms.S.Subashiny
For the Respondents : Mr.E.Omprakash
Senior Counsel
For Mr.K.Moorthy
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.Sathish Parasaran, learned Senior Counsel
for Ms.S.Subashiny, learned counsel for the appellant and
Mr.E.Omprakash, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Moorthy, learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The appellant is the original plaintiff. The appellant has filed
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
a suit for infringement of Trademark and passing off.
3. The appellant filed three applications for temporary
injunction. The said applications for temporary injunction were
rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeals.
4. The factual matrix up to the date of dissolution/amendment
of partnership between the directors of the appellant and the first
respondent is not disputed.
5. The only dispute was with regard to the use of the word “RT
Diagnostics” by the first respondent. The trademark “Aarthi
Diagnostics” was agreed to be used by the appellant and the
respondents were not to use the trademark “Aarthi Diagnostics”. The
same is not disputed. The first respondent is a partnership firm and
the respondents 2 and 3, the father and son, are the partners. It
started using the trade name “RT Diagnostics”. The same was the
cause for the appellant to file a suit.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
6. During the course of argument, learned Senior Counsel for
the respondents, referring to “RT Diagnostics” (formerly “Aarthi
Diagnostics”), accepted that the respondents have ceased using the
words “Aarthi Diagnostics” and the words “Formerly Aarthi
Diagnostics” and that the same would not be used by the
respondents. It was further accepted that in Tamil version, “RT
Diagnostics” only would be used and not “Aarthi Diagnostics”. The
necessary correction would also be carried out on the website of the
respondents.
7. So far as the other aspect is concerned, the same would be
decided only after trial and therefore, the parties can prove their
case before the learned Single Judge.
8. As regards imposition of cost, the parties were at the stage
of an interim application. While cost is imposed, some reasons have
to be given. We do not find proper reason for imposing cost.
Moreover, the same is at an interlocutory application stage. In the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
light of that, the order to the extent of imposing cost is set aside.
The observation made by the Court, while deciding the application
for injunction, is prima facie in nature. The suit would be decided on
the basis of the evidence adduced by the parties.
9. Accordingly, the appeals stand disposed of. There will be no
order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.19164, 19171 and 19163
of 2021 are closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.)
10.10.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar
Commercial Cases
High Court, Madras.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
(kpl)
O.S.A.(CAD) Nos.116 to 118 of 2021
10.10.2023
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
