G.S. SISTANI, J.

1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark and copyright, passing off, dilution of trademark, unfair competition, damages and delivery up. Together with the plaint, the plaintiff has filed the present application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC. While issuing summons in the suit, the following interim order was passed:

"06.02.2009

Present: Mr. Sudhir Chandra Aggarwal with Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. M.S. Bharath, Mr. Sanjay Chhabra and Mr. Varun Menon for the plaintiff. None for the defendant.

I.A. No. 1685 of 2009

Notice returnable on March 3, 2009.

This is an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the plaintiff seeking an ex-parte ad interim injunction order against the defendants restraining them, their officers, servants and agents etc. from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in alcoholic beverages, especially IMFL (Indian made Foreign Liquor) or goods of any description bearing the trademark and/or trade name Officer’s Special.

It is stated in the application that the plaintiff is in the business of manufacturing and marketing alcohol and beverages including IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) under various descriptive trademarks and labels, one of which is Officer’s Choice. The said trademark Officer’s Choice has a descriptive design, colour scheme, layout, cover and logo which has come to be exclusively associated with the plaintiff’s company. The plaintiffs have acquired the registration of trademark Officer’s Choice from the Registrar, Trade Marks under Class 33 for alcoholic beverages since October 26, 1990.

It is alleged that the defendants have also started manufacturing and selling whisky since December, 2008 and they are doing so under the trade name Officer’s Special which is deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff trade name inasmuch as it not only picks the word Officer from the trade name of the plaintiff but also bears substantial similarity with regard to the design, colour scheme and cover of the label.

Having regard to the aforementioned averments and also on a visual comparison of the trademark of the plaintiff and the defendants, I am prima-facie of the view that the plaintiff is entitled to an ex-parte ad interim injunction. Accordingly, the defendants, its officers, servants and agents are restrained from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in alcoholic beverages, especially IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) or goods of any description bearing the trademark and/or trade name Officer’s Special till further orders of this Court.

Provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be complied with, within one week.

Dasti."

2. Written statement as well as reply to the application have been filed.

3. The plaintiff is stated to be in the business of manufacturing and marketing alcoholic beverages, including Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL). The alcoholic beverages are sold under various distinctive trademarks and labels. The subject matter of the present dispute is with regard to the plaintiff’s trademark Officer’s Choice, which was originally coined in the year 1988. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff’s products under the trademark Officer’s Choice are sold throughout India and overseas. They have acquired an enviable reputation and goodwill, as a result of its excellent quality, distinctive packaging and characteristics namely, palatable taste, flavour, blending etc. The plaintiff claims that Officer’s Choice is one of the highest selling brands of the plaintiff and is considered as one of the largest selling whiskies’ in India and the plaintiff has been incurring extensive expenditure towards promotional campaigns in order to promote and publicize its product under the mark Officer’s Choice. According to the plaintiff, the p