JUDGMENT - S.M. JHUNJHUNUWALA J.:---The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for permanent injunction restraining the defendant by itself, its servants, agents, distributors and representatives from infringing the plaintiff's trade mark 'Betaloc' registered under No.326230 dated June 16, 1977 in Class 5 in respect of pharmaceutical preparation by use of the impugned trade mark 'Betalong' or any other trade mark deceptively similar to plaintiff's said registered trade mark "Betalong" or any other mark deceptively similar to plaintiff's trade mark "Betaloc" in relation to pharmaceuticals preparations and form manufacturing, selling offering for sale or otherwise dealing in pharmaceuticals preparations bearing the trade mark "Betalog" or any other mark deceptively similar to plaintiff's trade mark "Betaloc" so as to pass off the defendants goods as and for the goods of the plaintiff or in any other manner whatsoever and for damages, costs and other reliefs as prayed for in the Plaint filed. The plaintiff has taken out the present Notice of Motion for interim injunction in terms of permanent injunction prayed for in the Plaint filed.

2. As averred in the plaint, the plaintiff, a public limited company duly incorporated and registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, is carrying on business of manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical and medicinal products. The plaintiff is proprietor of trade mark 'Betaloc' which is registered under No. 326230 dated June 16, 1977, in Class 5 in respect of pharmaceuticals preparation. According to the plaintiff, by virtue of registration of the trade mark 'Betaloc' under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958, (hereinafter referred to as "The said Act"), and its long, extensive and continuous use and reputation, the plaintiff has acquired proprietory rights in the said trade mark 'Betaloc' and is entitled to its exclusive use in respect of all kinds of pharmaceuticals preparations in Class 5 under the said Act and the Rules made thereunder. The defendant is also a limited company duly incorporated and registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The defendant is also carrying on similar business in manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical and medicinal product. It is the case of the plaintitff that in or about the month of November 1987, the plaintiff became aware of the manufacture and sale of pharmaceutical product under the trade name 'Betalong' by the defendant. The plaintiff has been using the said trade mark 'Betaloc' in respect of drug for the treatment of hyper tension, angina pectoris, arrythanias, etc. the defendant's product is also for the treatment of hyper tension, angina pectoris, arrythanias, etc. the defendants's product is also for the treatment of hyper tension, angina pectoris, arrythanias, etc. On acquiring the knowledge about the defendant's said product, the plaintiff realised that its rights were being impaired by the defendant and as such the plaintiff through its trade mark attorneys served a cease and desist notice dated November 18, 1987 upon the defendant. The said letter was replied by the defendant vide its letter dated December 28, 1987. The defendant refused to comply with the requisitions made by the plaintiff in the said cease and desist notice. According to the plaintiff, despite the said cease and desist notice the defendant has been continuing the use of the trade mark 'Betalong' with a view to trade upon and benefit from the reputation and goodwill enjoyed by the plaintiff's trade mark 'Betaloc'. The plaintiff has averred that the trade and public in normal course are likely to believe that the defendant's goods also emanates from the plaintiff. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant has adopted the trade mark 'Betalong' with dishonest intention and the defendant has committed acts of infringement in adopting and using the similar trade mark 'Betalong' in respect of the similar goods. According to the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document