( 1 ) THESE three appeals by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 1259/2004 on the file of the VIII Addl. The order dated 27. 5. 2004 wherein I. As. I to III filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, wherein ad-interim order of injunction granted has been vacated.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case in brief leading up to these appeals with reference to the rank of the parties before the trial court are as follow: the plaintiff filed a suit O. S. 1259/2004 against the defendants seeking for permanent injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their partners, manufacturers, servants, licensees, agents, printers, carries and distributors or any one claiming under them from in any manner:"a) committing passing off their detergents goods bearing the label mark SOUNDARI as and for or being connected with the business of plaintiff by using deceptive similar mark in any modified form or by using the colour scheme or get up. b) committing infringement of copyright in the artistic work of plaintiffs label SUNDARI by distributing printing or cause to be printed the impugned label of the defendants SOUNDARI. c) from marketing and selling detergent goods under any deceptively similar name to that of SUNDARI in the State of Karnataka either directly or indirectly by violating the terms and conditions of the settlement Deed dated 8. 3. 2003 entered between the plaintiffs husband and first defendant; d) directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff all the unused labels, wrappers and other printed matters containing or consisting of the offending mark together with blocks used for the purpose of printing the same for destruction and costs. "

( 3 ) IN the said suit, the plaintiff filed IAS. I to III order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. , seeking for an order of temporary injunction against the defendants in terms of the final relief sought for as per clauses (a) (b) and (c) referred to above. An order of exparte temporary injunction was granted on25. 2. 2004. After the appearance the defendants filed objections to the applications with the counter affidavit of the defendants and the trial court by its order dated 27. 5. 2004 vacated the ad-interim injunction granted on25. 2. 2004 and being aggrieved by the said common order on I. As. I to III the plaintiff is before this Court in this appeal.

( 4 ) I have heard the learned senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff-appellant and the learned senior counsel appearing for the defendants-respondents and scrutinized the material on record.

( 5 ) IT is clear from the material on record that the plaintiff filed I. As. I to III for the above said reliefs of temporary injunction under order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. , along with the affidavit of the Power of Attorney Holder of the plaintiff averring that the plaintiff is a proprietorship firm carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of detergent soaps and detergent powder under the labelmark SUNDARI. Originally the label mark SUNDAEI was being used by the plaintiffs husband viz. , D. Suyaraj along with his brother D. Mohanraj, who is first defendant herein under the name and style of Lakshimi Industries at No. 138, Sundakkamuthur Road, Comimbatore-641 026. Subsequently there were several changes in the constitution of the firm Lakshmi Industries. Finally, a settlement was effected on 8. 3. 1993 between the plaintiffs husband D. Suryaraj and the first defendant D. Mohanraj with regard to the continuous and simultaneous use of the label mark SUNDARI by both of them. Accordingly the plaintiffs husband D. Suryaraj is entitled to use the label mark SUNDARI in 17districts of the state of Tamilnadu including the entire State of Karnataka. The first defendant is entitled to use the label mark SUNDARI in the State of Tamilnadu including the entire state of Andhra Pradesh. Thereby the first defendant is not entitled to market the detergent cakes and powder under the label mark SUNDARI in the State of Karnataka by virtue of settlement deed dated 8. 3.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document