( 1 ) THESE two C. M. A. No. 1715/96 and C. M. A. No. 46/97 have been filed being aggrieved by the common judgment and order dated 6-11-1996 passed by the iii Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on I. A. No. 35/96 in o. S. No. 2/96 and on I. A. No. 237/96 in O. S. No. 6/96. The appellant in C. M. A. No. 1715/96 is the plaintiff in O. S. No. 2/96 and the appellant in C. M. A. No. 46/97 is the plaintiff in O. S. No. 6/96. By the impugned order their respective I. As filed for injunction restraining the respective defendents in each suit from using the trade mark annapurna either by itself or in combination of any other word or words or any other mark identical with or deceptively similar thereto in relation to their respective goods viz. whole wheat flour/atta so as to pass off or enable any other person to pass off their goods, have been dismissed by the court below and at the same time directing the plaintiffs in both the suits to maintain the status-quo ante. The counsel for the appellant in both the cases strenuously contended that the impugned order is illegal and without jurisdiction and contrary to the materials on record. They submitted that the court has erred in directing them to maintain status- quo. According to the appellant s counsel in both the cases there should have been an injunction in favour of the respective plaintiffs as against the respective defendents.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions on both sides, I have to summarily note the facts of this case. The plaintiff in O. S. No. 2/96 sri M. Mahendra Shah filed the present suit alleging that he has engaged in the manufacture, sale and marketing of items including wheat, flour etc. under the trade mark annapurna which is also the trade mark he under which he carries on the business. The said trade mark he has been using since long. He further alleged that in the year 1996 he has sold goods worth rs. 2,37,500/- and he has also advertised under the said trade mark in various newspapers, periodicals etc. In order to popularise his products he incurred a lot of expenditure for advertisements. He further stated that he has already made an application bearing No. 657595 for registering the said trade mark annapurna for the goods he markets, which fall under class 30 of iv Schedule of Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules (1959), and the same is pending. He further stated that recently he came to know that the defendents m/s Hindustan Lever Limited and two others have been using a similar trade mark "annapurna" along with the word "gold SEAL" on their product namely wheat flour (atta) only with a view to pass off their goods as those of the petitioner and thus the defendents have been causing great damage and injury to the plaintiff s reputation as well as his-business. Under these circumstances the defendents were liable to be restrained from using the trade mark annapurna for their goods. Along with the suit Mr. M. Mahendra shah (hereinafter referred to as Mr. M. Shah) filed I. A. No. 35/96 for injunction. On that LA. it appears that an ex parte injunction was granted on 2-2-96 for a period upto 26-2-96. Meanwhile the M/s Hindustan Lever Limited (hereinafter referred to as hll) i. e. , the D-2 in the case, filed a counter denying the allegations made by the plaintiff inter alia contending that the suit as filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable. Further contending that the defendents were engaged in manufacturing, selling and exporting of food items such as vanaspati, edible oils, soaps, detergents, personal products etc. , and in the year 1992 in order to extend their food business decided to engage in marketing stable food such as salt, pulses, rice, atta, maida etc, and for such products they adopted the trade mark annapurna as a suitable name for their staple food business. Accordingly they applied for registration of the trade mark annapurna by itself and also in combination with the trade mark go