Anil Dev Singh, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application whereby the plaintiffs seek to restrain the defendants by means of a temporary injunction from using the trade mark and trade name BAKER or any other trade mark or trade name deceptively similar thereto as their corporate name or as a part thereof. The facts necessary for the disposal of the application are as under: The first plaintiff Baker Hughes Limited (formerly known as Baker International Limited) is a company organised under the laws of United Kingdom. The principal place of business is located in Warwick Street, London. The second plaintiff Baker Hughes Incorporated is a company organised under the laws of Delaware, United States of America. Its principal place of business is located at Houston,, Texas (hereinafter, for short, the group of baker or baker Hughes companies collectively shall be referred to as "baker" or "baker Hughes" ). The second plaintiff is a parent company of the first plaintiff and is stated to own the trade mark BAKER.

( 2 ) THE first defendant Mr. Hiroo Khushalani is the Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of the second defendant. The second defendant Baker Oil Tools (India) Private Limited is a company incorporated in India under a certificate of incorporation dated February 13, 1985.

( 3 ) IN 1982 the first defendant had discussions with Bakerline, a Bakeroil Tools Company, Texas, USA (a division of Baker International Ltd.), for floating a joint venture company in India for the manufacture of oil field equipment and products. On May 13, 1982 the first defendant wrote a letter to Bakerline, in confirmation of their discussions, in which it was stated, inter-alia, that Baker Oil Tools or any of its subsidiary companies will have 40% equity participation in the capital structure of the joint venture company which was intended to be set up in India by the first defendant as its promoter. It was proposed that Baker Oil Tools will receive 5% royalty on the products manufactured by the joint venture company for use within India. Besides, Baker Oil Tools or any of its nominated subsidiary companies will receive a sum of US dollars 20,00,000 for the transfer of drawings and technical documentation to the Indian company. On September20,1983, the first defendant, as the sole proprietor of Miraksha Associates, applied to the Ministry of Industry, Department of Industrial Development for permission to establish a joint venture with M/s. Bakerline for manufacturing oil field equipment. The Government of India by its letter hearing No. L-/260 (84) dated April 6,1984 (for short the letter of intent ), addressed to the first defendant, expressed its willingness to issue an industrial licence under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, to the latter for the establishment of a new industrial undertaking for the manufacture of oil ficid equipment, namely. Conventional Float Collars and Shoe, Differential Float Collars and Shoe, Centralizers, Scratchers. Stop Ring, Bridge Plugs, Cement Retainers, Stage Cementing Collars, Liner Hangers and Accessories and Pump Feud and Pass at Gurgaon (Haryana), subject to the following conditions amongst others:

(1) The terms of foreign collaboration (Financial and/or Technical) will be settled to the satisfaction of the Government of India. (2) The use of foreign brand name will not be permitted for the purpose of internal sales. By a separate letter bearing No. FC-147 (83)Comp/scs dated April 6, 1984 the Government of India, in response to the request of the first defendant dated September20,1983, expressed its willingness to approve the terms of the collaboration with M/s. Bakerline (for short the letter of approval of foreign collaboration ), subsequently amended to read as Baker Oil Tools (U. K.) limited and finally as baker Oil Tools (U. K. .) Division instead of M/s. Bakerline vide letter of the Government of India dated March 17,1986 read with letter dated February 4,1986.

( 4 ) THE condition

Click Here to Read the rest of this document