In order to obtain an order of temporary injunction in an action for infringement of trade-mark or of passing off, the plaintiff must show that the goods of the plaintiff have acquired a distinctiveness and are associated in the mind of the general public as goods of the plaintiff and that the user of the said trade-mark or the trade-name by the defendant is likely to deceive and cause confusion in the public mind and cause injury to the business reputation of the plaintiff.

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.

1. THIS is an appeal against Order No. 8 dated April 13, 2006 passed by the learned Judge, Eleventh Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, in Title Suit No. 274 of 2006.

2. BY the order impugned the learned trial Judge allowed an application for temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the said suit on contest; the ad interim order of injunction passed by the said court on March 8, 2006 was made absolute till the disposal of the said suit.

This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. The plaintiff files the suit for declaration that the use of mark champion as suffix to the mark Mach 3 Turbo by the defendant is identical and deceptively similar to the registered trade-mark champion of the plaintiff and hence resulting in an infringement and/or passing off their goods as those of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, also, prays for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant and all persons connected with the defendants or acting on behalf of the defendant from in any way using the trade-mark champion of the plaintiff in any form either per se or in combination with other marks, which is very identical and deceptively similar to the registered trade-murk of the plaintiff in respect of safety razor blades, safety razors and allied goods in any manner whatsoever; an enquiry into the loss and damage by the plaintiff and decree for the amount found due upon such enquiry; delivery and destruction of all the offending goods bearing the trade-mark champion.

3. THE plaintiff states that the plaintiff is a renowned manufacturer, merchant and exporter, inter alia, of safety razor blades, safely razors, blades and shaving systems. In respect of the safety razors and safety razor blades, the plaintiff has been and is still using the trade-mark champion since 1962. THE plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the said mark champion since 1964. THE registration of the trade-mark is in force, valid and subsisting. THE trade-marks of the plaintiffs have acquired global brand recognition and the plaintiff has created strongest consumer brands in the country and, also, in abroad. THE safety razors and safety razor blades bearing the said trade-mark champion have a large sale and have earned considerable goodwill and imputation amongst the members of the public trade associates and in the market at large. THE consumers identify the said mark with the plaintiff and none else. THE defendant introduces shaving razors bearing the mark Much 3 Turbo champion by prefixing the registered trade-mark of the plaintiff with the trade-mark of the defendant, that is, Much 3 Turbo, which is deceptively similar to the trade-mark of the plaintiff. THE mark champion adopted by the defendant- company is likely to lead and/or may lead purchasers and/or consumers to believe that the goods under the mark Mach 3 Turbo champion offered for sale by the defendant has originated from the plaintiff or that the defendant has business connection with the plaintiff and/or the plaintiff is a subsidiary of the defendant. THE defendant, also, assured the plaintiff, in course of negotiations, that the defendant will not use the registered trade-mark champion of the plaintiff in relation to double edged conventional blades. THE plaintiff allegs that the action of the defendant has been tarnishing the image of the plaintiff and causing huge loss and hampering its business besides such infringement and/or passing off.

4. THE said suit is registered as Title Suit No. 274 of 2006 and is presently pending before the learned Judge, Eleventh Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta.

In connection with the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application for temporary injunction under Order 39, rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inter alia, seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant and