Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Aqua Pump Industries vs Majestic Pride Industry
2024 Latest Caselaw 354 Mad

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 354 Mad
Judgement Date : 5 January, 2024

Madras High Court

Aqua Pump Industries vs Majestic Pride Industry on 5 January, 2024

Author: Abdul Quddhose

Bench: Abdul Quddhose

                                                                        C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

                                  THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 05.01.2024

                                                       CORAM:

                                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                          C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023
                                                        and
                                            O.A. No.998 and 999 of 2023
                                                        and
                                                  A. 6223 of 2023

                     1. Aqua Pump Industries
                     Rep. by its Managing Partner
                     Mr.Ramaswamy Kumaravelu

                     2. Aqua Sub Engineering
                     Rep. by its Managing Partner
                     Mr.Ramaswamy Kumaravelu                                ....           Plaintiffs
                                                         Vs

                     Majestic Pride Industry,
                     Rajkot,
                     Gujarat – 384 002.                                                ... Defendant

                     Prayer :          PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER IV RULE 1 O.S.
                     RULES AND ORDER VII, RULE 1 OF THE C.P.C. READ WITH
                     SEC. 27, 134 & 135 OF THE TRADE MARKS ACT 1999 to grant a
                     judgment and decree on the following terms :
                         a) granting a permanent injunction, restraining the Defendant, by itself,
                     their servants, agents, distributors, or anyone claiming through them from
                     manufacturing, selling, advertising and offering for sale using the Trade
                     Mark TEXMO as such or prefix or suffix in any Electric Motors, pumps

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/9
                                                                          C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

                     and Agriculture Machines, etc. included in Class 7 or in any other goods
                     manufactured and sold by the Defendant or its trading style or in any
                     media and use the same in invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or by
                     using any other trade mark which is in any way visually, or phonetically
                     identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered Trade Mark
                     TEXMO or in any manner infringing the Plaintiffs Registered Trade
                     Mark Nos. 315049 (SP-I), (SP-II) & 315050 (SP-I), (SP-II) renumbered
                     as 2702778, 2702779, 2702780 & 2702781 respectively and other
                     registrations in para 8 of the plaint.


                         b] granting a permanent injunction, restraining the Defendant, by itself,
                     their servants, agents, distributors, or anyone claiming through them from
                     manufacturing, selling, advertising and offering for sale using the Trade
                     Mark TEXMO as such or with prefix or suffix in any Electric Motors,
                     pumps and Agriculture Machines, etc. included in Class 7 or in any other
                     goods manufactured and sold by the Defendant and its trading style or in
                     any media and use the same in invoices, letter heads and visiting cards or
                     by using any other trade mark which is in any way visually, or
                     phonetically identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs Trade Mark
                     TEXMO or in any manner pass off the Plaintiffs' goods.


                             c) directing the Defendant to surrender to the Plaintiffs all the goods,
                     packing materials, cartons, advertisement materials and hoardings, letter-
                     heads, visiting cards, office stationery and all other materials
                     containing/bearing the Trade Mark TEXMO or other deceptively similar
                     mark to the Plaintiffs' Trademark TEXMO,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     2/9
                                                                            C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023




                        d) directing the Defendant to render an account of profits made by them
                     by the use of the impugned trademark TEXMO on the goods Electric
                     Motors, pumps and Agriculture Machines, etc. Included in Class 7 and
                     decree the suit for the profits found to have been made by the Defendant,
                     after the Defendant has rendered account and


                             e) directing the Defendant to pay to the Plaintiffs the costs of the suit


                                        For Plaintiff            : MS. Gladys Daniel



                                                           JUDGEMENT

Both the parties have arrived at a settlement. The settlement terms

which is recorded in the Memorandum of Compromise between the

plaintiffs and the defendant, which is dated 13.12.2023 is placed on

record. However, the said Memorandum of Compromise has been signed

only by the defendant and their counsel, but has not been signed by the

plaintiffs. It has been signed by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs

alone. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that on

instructions that the plaintiffs are agreeable to the terms of settlement as

found in the Memorandum of Compromise, dated 13.12.2023 which has

been signed by the defendant and its counsel. However, she would https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

submit that since the plaintiffs representative is at Coimbatore, she could

not get the signature today itself. However, she has no objection, if the

terms of the settlement are recorded in this Court's judgment and a decree

be passed in terms thereof. Accordingly, the Memorandum of

Compromise, dated 13.12.2023 which is placed on record, today is

incorporated in this Court's judgment and it reads as follows :-

...........

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

2. In terms of the above settlement this suit is decreed. Consequently

connected applications are closed.

05.01.2024

Index: Yes/ No Speaking order / Non speaking order Neutral citation : Yes / No vsi2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vsi2

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.285 of 2023

05.01.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter