Devinder Gupta, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff in a suit for passing off of trade marks, rendition of accounts and damages has in the application under order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "the Code") sought an order of injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, representatives, distributors and dealers and all other persons on their behalf from selling the pressure cookers (non-electric) under the trade mark VISHAL king and/or other trade mark containing the word "vishal" till final disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) AFTER summons were issued and notice in the application was sent, the defendant put in appearance and filed its reply. Pleadings are complete. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) THE suit is filed on the allegation that plaintiff firm is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of pressure cookers (non- electric) etc. being house hold kitchen goods for the last many years. The plaintiff is using one of the celebrated trade mark VISHAL in respect of pressure cookers (nonelectric) since the year 1984 continuously, extensively and openly and without any objection from anyone. The business carried on by the plaintiff is an extensive one and the aforesaid trade mark VISHAL has always been mentioned on the goods and packing thereof. The plaintiff being the proprietor and owner of the trade mark VISHAL, therefore, it is unlawful for any other person or firm to use the identical and/or deceptively similar trade mark as that of the plaintiff in respect of same goods or the goods of the same description. It is also alleged that the plaintiff has conducted huge sales of the aforesaid goods under the trade mark VISHAL through most of the states in the country and people in the trade associates, the aforesaid goods under the trade mark VISHAL with the plaintiff only. The plaintiff has acquired tremendous goodwill and reputation in respect of the trade mark VISHAL in respect of pressure cookers (non-electrical ).

( 4 ) IN order to protect the interest in the trade mark, the plaintiff filed an application for its registration with the Trade Marks Authorities under no-487390 inclass 21 dated 15th March, 1988 in respect of pressure cookers claiming its user since 1st april, 1984. The application was accepted by the Registrar, Trade Marks, Bombay in respect of specification of goods pressure cookers (non-electric) for advertisement in the Trade Marks Journal. In December, 1991, the plaintiff came across the goods of the defendant under the trade mark VISHAL KING and on enquiries made, it was learnt that the defendant was selling pressure cookers (non-electric) under identical and/or deceptively similar trade mark and above the word "vishal" the defendant was using the word "r" in a circle, falsely representing that the mark VISHAL stands registered in the name of the defendant.

( 5 ) IT is alleged that the defendant came in the market recently. Since the defendant had complete knowledge that the mark VISHAL belongs to the plaintiff and the plaintiff is the owner and proprietor and prior user of the mark VISHAL in respect of pressure cookers (non-electric) and the plaintiff had tremendous goodwill and reputation, out of greed and in order to cash on the plaintiff s goodwill and reputation, the defendant started marketing pressure cookers under the identical and/or deceptively similar trade mark VISHAL KING without getting any permission or licence from the plaintiff. The defendant is also using the word "r" above the mark VISHAL, which is causing confusing in the market. People and traders are being deceived and they are purchasing the goods of the defendant believing in good faith that the mark of the defendant is registered. On search being conducted , it has been found that there is no trade mark registered in the name of the defendant. The plaintiff thereafter filed a complaint against the defendant under Section 81 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 for mak

Click Here to Read the rest of this document