1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties for ad-interim relief only.

2 The Plaintiff/company is engaged in the business of manufacture, distilling and sale of alcoholic beverages including whisky. The Plaintiff is the third largest manufacturers of spirits products in the world. The Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the trade-marks “Black Dog” (both words and label). In the market, such whisky, the trade marks/label marks is also known and recognized by the phonetic use of words “Block Dog”. Therefore, the use of the words “Black Dog” in respect of any drink purported to be whisky which is not the Plaintiff's whisky amounts to an infringement of Plaintiff's registered trade-mark.

3 Defendants 1 to 4 are the co-producers of Cinematograph film entitled “Kismat Love Paisa Dilli” (the said film) which, according to the plaintiff, contains disparaging statements about the plaintiff's well known whisky sold under the trade-mark “Black Dog”. The averments are supported by an affidavit and the relevant documents including the relevant clips/copies of slide shows of the promos of the movie which will be releasing in the theatres on 5 October 2012 as promoted and advertised.

4 An affidavit of service is filed. The matter was circulated urgently on 3 October 2012 as it was pertaining to other Bench. In view of urgency shown, listed today for ad-interim relief.

5 Respondent no.5, the Director of the film, has filed affidavit in reply opposing the grant of ad-interim relief.

6 The Plaintiff is basically seeking an injunction and/or restraintment order against the Defendants and/or its agents from in any manner, directly or indirectly, publishing, exhibiting and continue to publish or exploiting the offending telecast or impugned promos and/or impugned scenes of the film, containing the scenes as depicted in slide shows, Exhibit Q ( 1 to 20) or any other similar disparaging and/or defematory telecast which contains improper slanderous, libellous, reference to the Plaintiff's registered trade-mark “Black Dog”. For ad-interim, the basic submissions are made revolving around Clip Nos. 15 and 16, apart from visual/scene, the dialogue are : “MVO-Sahi hai yaar ! Black Dog?” in Clip No.15. In Clip No.16, the dialogue is “MVO – Nahi Sir, Canada ka hai ji, Lucky Dog”.

7 The Defendants, through Defendant No.5, have averred as under:

“5 I say that, the trademark of the Plaintiff's “BLACK DOG” is removed/deleted from all the promos. I further say that, Plaintiff's trade mark “Black Dog” is not appearing in any of the scenes in the said film as the same has been removed/deleted from the original prints which have been sent for exhibition. In these circumstances the Plaintiff's have not made out any case for stalling the release of the said movie/film as the Plaintiff's trade mark “Black Dog” is not used in any of the scenes in the original prints which are dispatched for exhibition.”

8 The submissions are also made that they have already spent the crores of rupees and sold distributorship rights, the prints of movies have already been reached to respective destination for being released world wide. Therefore, opposed the ad-interim by stating that no prima facie case, balance of convenience, lies in favour of the Plaintiff. They will suffer irreparable loss in case release of the said film is stalled. However, contended that no prejudice will cause as Plaintiff's trade-mark is not appearing in any of the scenes of the film.

9 Admittedly, there is no dispute with regard to the Plaintiff's trade-mark, name and fame. Even otherwise, the Defendants who are not competitors of the Plaintiff, in no way, in a position to deny the same. We are not concerned with the dispute between the competitors of the trade-mark.

10 We are also not concerned here about the censorship of the film. The remedy is elsewhere.

11 The Plaintiff's case referring to the scene in question is as under:

a) the leading star of the said film i.e. Vivek Oberoi