S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. This common order will dispose of pending temporary injunctions in the four suits.

2. The facts necessary for disposing of this order are that the Plaintiff in all the four cases is M/S Sancheti Appliances Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Sancheti"). In CS(OS) No. 1529/2006 Sancheti sues M/s D.K. Electrical (hereafter referred to as "D.K.") for alleged passing off in respect of trade mark "Pretty" used for electrical appliances such as sockets, switches and other allied products. D.K. in turn preferred a counter claim alleging that it is the proprietor of the registered trademark "Pretty" since 2004.

3. In CS(OS) No. 1530/2006 Sancheti sues M/S J.K. Electrical Industries (hereafter referred to as "J.K.") complaining of passing off in respect of trademark "Winner" used for marketing electrical appliances. In CS(OS) No. 2363/2007 a similar injunction is claimed as in CS(OS) No. 1529/2006, in respect of "Pretty" against the same Defendant i.e. D.K. In CS(OS) No. 2364/2007 Sancheti claims a permanent injunction and consequential reliefs against M/s Pritam Electrical (hereafter referred to as "Pritam") for passing off in respect of trademark "Pretty". Pritam claims to be assignee of the mark with effect from 01.04.2004 from M/s D.K. Electrical.

4. The common case of Sancheti in all the suits is that originally Shri Ashok Kumar Sancheti was the sole proprietor of the concern who had conceived and adopted the "Winner" and "Pretty" marks in respect of electrical accessories, fittings, fuse, fuse units, switches, sockets, indicators, electrical bells, buzzers, lightening fixtures, holders, fan regulators etc. (hereinafter referred as the "appliances"). It is averred in all the suits that Shri Ashok Kumar Sancheti, (the sole proprietor), established M/s Sancheti Electrical in the year 1980 and in December 1993 he established another proprietary concern under the style M/s Sancheti Distributors and continued to carry on business and marketing of products under the same marks. It is further averred that goods were even exported under the same marks, claiming that the business grew exponentially and earned extensive reputation both in India and abroad. The suits contend that in August 1998 the said proprietor Shri Ashok Kumar Sancheti promoted and incorporated the Plaintiff Company with the objective of engaging itself in business concerning the same products. It is also contended that the two trademarks were transferred to the company for commercial exploitation. Through all these pleadings the Plaintiff claims continuous and uninterrupted usage of the trademarks of "Winner" and "Pretty" since 1980.

5. It is also alleged that labels for the marks involved underlying work of art, which was registered in the year 2007. They were, however, rectified by the Copyright Board by its order dated 31st March, 2009 on the ground that it had not complied with Rule 16 (3) of Indian Copyright Rules. The said order was set aside by a Division Bench rd of this Court on 3August, 2009 directing the Copyright Board to consider the application for registration afresh.

6. The Plaintiff urges that its marks have gained considerable reputation and earned notoriety and are valid for the goods marketed under those brands, are known for their quality and precision. The Plaintiff urges having achieved considerable sales in this regard. It is also claimed that Plaintiff has applied for trademark registration in th respect of both "Pretty" and "Winner" marks on 26July, 2006. To substantiate the claim for usage of the marks, the Plaintiff is relying upon the importer-exporter code certificate issued by Ministry of Commerce, Central Government on 18.05.2001 and 23.04.2001. They also relied upon a large number of invoices including export invoices and orders placed by overseas companies, for which bills were issued and these were in respect of the years from 2000 onwards. The Plaintiff further relies upon a certificate of enlistment issue