A piquant situation has arisen at the time of extending ad interim order passed on 12th May, 2016 by which the respondent was restrained from selling and/or offering for sale or marketing tea in the packet the labels of which containing ‘Nowalty’ being similar to or a colourable imitation of the petitioner’s logo or product ‘Lipton’ or from passing off or committing to pass off causing or enabling or assigning to others pass off the products, not of the petitioner’s manufacture and the products containing labels, style, get up and colour scheme of the petitioner’s trade mark or any reproduction or colour imitation thereof. An argument was advanced from the petitioner’s side that the respondent is marketing and selling its product through the mark ‘Nowelty’ on the packets in which the product is sold, which is similar and identical to the petitioner’s label in trade design, graphics and colour combination. It was further argued before the Court that the word ‘Lipton’ is a registered trade mark written in a distinct artistic font in unique shape. What was argued on that day was that the respondent has not only infringed the trade mark but has also passed off its product in