Kent Ro System Ltd. vs Gattubhai - 2022 Supreme(Del) 172

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Del) 172

AMIT BANSAL
Kent Ro System Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Gattubhai – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Senior Advocate With Ms. Rajeshwari H., Mr. Deepanshu Nagar And Mr. P.D.V. Srikar, Advocates, for the Appellant, Mr. C.M. Lall, Senior Advocate With Mr. Subhash Bhutoria, Mr. Amit Panigrahi, Ms. Ananya Chug, And Ms.Trushita Mehra, Advocates, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J. - IA No.1953/2022 (for directions)

1. In light of the judgment passed today in IA No. 10997/2019 and IA No. 704/2020, the present application stands disposed of as satisfied.

IA No.10997/2019 (u/O.XXXIX R.1&2 of the CPC) & IA No. 704/2020 (of the defendants u/O.XXXIX R.4 of the CPC)

2. By the present order, I propose to dispose of the application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for grant of interim injunction and the application filed on behalf of the defendants under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC for vacation of ex parte ad-interim injunction granted by this Court vide order dated 13th August, 2019.

3. Vide order dated 13th August, 2019, this Court had passed an ex parte ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising or in any manner dealing on product bearing a mark "KENT" or "KENT APPLIANCES" or variants thereof or any other mark or logo or trade name, which is deceptively similar to the trade mark of the plaintiffs.

4. The case set up by the plaintiff in the plaint is that:-

(i) The plaintiff no. 1 is Kent RO System Ltd. an