IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
OZONE SPA PRIVATE LIMITED - Plaintiff
Versus
PURE FITNESS & ORS. - Defendants
CS (OS) No.1815/2015
Decided On : 29-07-2015
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
I.A. Nos.12565/2015 (u/o XXXIX R.1 & 2 CPC, by plaintiff) and R.P. No.318/2015 (to be treated as u/o XXXIX R.4 CPC as per order dated 3rd July, 2015, by defendants)
1. The plaintiff has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining breach of contract, breach of confidentiality/trade secrets, infringement of trademarks, get-up, layout, arrangement, trade dress of Ozone Fitness Centre, Salon and Spa, unfair competition as well as for damages/rendition of accounts of profit against the defendants.
2. The suit and the interim application being I.A. No.12565/2015 were listed before the Vacation Court on 24th June, 2015.
3. By order dated 24th June, 2015, the Court issued the summons in the suit and notice in the interim application as well as granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction. The operative part of the said order is read as under:-
".....Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, defendant Nos.1 and 2, their partners, family members or through anyone acting for and on their behalf are restrained from establishing, running or setting up any competing business including fitness centres, salons, spas or any other business, under the name Hairmasters/Hair Masters or under any other name in violation and breach of the franchise agreement dated 5.11.2012 and supplementary agreements dated 1.4.2013 and 29.3.2014."
4. The Court also appointed two Local Commissioners with directions to visit the premises of the defendants and inventorize the publicity material, take photographs of infringed material and sign the books of accounts.
5. Upon service, the defendants No.1 and 2 filed an application under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC seeking review of the order dated 24th June, 2015 passed in I.A. No.12565/2015.
6. The said review application was listed before the same Bench on 3rd July, 2015 wherein it was prayed by defendants No.1 and 2 to treat the said application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.
7. Reply and rejoinder have been filed. Written Statement is yet to be filed.
8. The matter was listed before this Court first time on 10th July, 2015. Parties agreed to meet on 11th July, 2015 for settlement, if any.
9. No settlement was arrived. Parties addressed their submissions on 14th July, 2015 in part in both interim applications i.e. under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC filed by the plaintiff and under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC filed by the defendants. The defendants have relied upon the application for vacation of interim order and other material available on record in order to resist the injunction application and no separate reply to I.A. No.12565/2015 was filed. As such, learned counsel for the defendants has pressed for early hearing. Thus, both the applications are taken up together.
10. In order to discuss the rival submissions of the parties, it is necessary to refer the relevant contents of plaint.
Case of the plaintiff as per averments in the plaint:-
11. (a) The plaintiff-Company is the country's premier boutique health spa. Each of its centres is spread over 11,000 sq. feet and provide the highest standards of service. It launched its first Health Centre and Spa under the brand OZONE on 26th October, 2002. The plaintiff-Company is primarily engaged into health-care, fitness, salon and spa industry and the same is promoted under the mark OZONE.
(b) The plaintiff has established itself as a one-of-its-kind fitness/spa/salon centre, whose members include many eminent personalities, like Ms. Sania Mirza, Ms. Ekta Chaudhary, Pantaloons Femina Miss India Universe 2009, well-known model Mr.Inder Mohan Sudan etc. The plaintiff has grown leaps and bounds and established many health centres of international standard throughout India including in Gurgaon, Hyderabad, Chandigarh and Bangalore. Apart from the aforementioned places, the plaintiff also has plans to commence operations in Ludhiana, Indor
S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath
Wipro Ltd vs. Beckman Coulter International S.A.
FL Smidth Pvt. Ltd vs. Secan Invescast (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Independent News Service Pvt. vs. Mr. Anuraag Muskaan.
The Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. and Anr vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.
Nathmal Jodharaj through LR’s Ramesh Nathmal Agrawal vs. Chandrarao Vijaysingh Deshmukh.
Moorgate Mercantile Co. Ltd. v. Twitchings
Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors.
Abdulla Ahmed v. Animendra Kissen Mitter, AIR 1950 SC 15 : 1950 SCR 30
gpt-4
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.