1. This is the defendants’ notice of motion to reject the plaint in exercise of powers under order 7 rule 11 of the C.P.C. Mr.Dhond submitted that even assuming that the provision of order 7 rule 11 do not apply, the Court ought to reject the plaint in exercise of powers under section 151 of the C.P.C.

2. The question that falls for consideration is whether the institution of an action for infringement is barred if the defendants’ mark is also registered. I have held it is not.

3. The suit is filed for infringement and passing off. Leave under clause XIV of the Letters Patent has been sought but not obtained as yet. The contention in support of this notice of motion is that as the defendants’ mark is also registered, this Court lacks inherent jurisdiction to entertain or try the suit for infringement. If that is so, the question of granting leave under clause XIV cannot arise.

4. In support of this contention, Mr.Dhond firstly relied upon the following provision of section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 :-

“29. Infringement of registered trade marks.—(1) A registered trade mark is infringed by a person who, not being a registered proprietor or a person using by way o