JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar, J.

This order shall dispose of plaintiffs' application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking restraint against the defendant from using his registered trade mark 'MEROMER' alleged to be deceptively similar to the plaintiffs' trade mark 'MERONEM' and defendant's application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC to vacate the interim order dated 6th October, 2005 whereby defendant was restrained from selling, marketing or in any manner dealing with pharmaceutical product under the name 'MEROMER'.

2. Brief facts to comprehend the disputes between the parties are that plaintiffs filed the suit for permanent injunction seeking restraint of infringement of their trade mark and passing off of his products by the defendant as that of plaintiff contending that plaintiff No. 1, Astrazeneca U.K. Limited, is a company constituted under the laws of England having its registered office at London which was formed as a result of the merger of two world renowned pharmaceutical groups, namely, Astra AB incorporated in Sweden and its subsidiary Zeneca Ltd. incorporated in the United Kingdom. It was asserted that pursuant to merger of Astra AB and Zeneca, plaintiff No. 1 became the assignee of registered trade mark 'MERONEM' bearing registration No. 532328 in class 5 in India from Zeneca Limited. Zeneca Ltd. had obtained the registration in its name on 27th June, 1990 which is valid and subsisting till 26th June, 2014 and this was assigned by Zeneca Limited in favor of plaintiff No. 1 by deed of assignment dated 4th January, 2000. It was further stated that another deed of assignment dated 9th August, 2000 was executed by Zeneca Limited to facilitate formal registration of the assignment of several of Zeneca's trade marks including 'MERONEM' and this assignment deed dated 9th August, 2000 along with form TM 24 was lodged with the Registrar of trade mark by letter dated 28th March, 2001 and the application is pending with the trade mark Registry, Bombay. The plaintiff No. 1 thus claimed all the rights in respect of registered trade mark 'MERONEM' until 26th June, 2014. plaintiff No. 2, AstraZeneca Pharma India Limited, is stated to be a company incorporated in India which entered into a license agreement dated 1st March, 2002 with plaintiff No. 1 to use the trade mark 'MERONEM'.

3. The plaintiffs contended that the drug under the brand name 'MERONEM' is marketed by plaintiff No. 1 since 1995-96 in over 89 countries. Drug of the plaintiffs 'MERONEM' is a pharmaceutical preparation of 'MEROPENEM' which is a sterile dry powder for intravenous injection or infusion which has to be reconstituted before injecting and/or infusing intravenously. This drug belongs to carbapenem group of antibiotics and is used for curing serious life threatening infections such as Pneumonias and Nosocomial Pneumonias; Urinary tract infections; Intra abdominal infections; Gynaecological infections such as endowment. It is and pelvic inflammatory disease; Skin and skin structure infections, meningitis, septicaemia and Empiric treatment for presumed infections in adult patients with febrile neutropeNa used as mono-therapy or used in combination with antiviral or anti fungal agents.

4. The dosages and administration of the drug depends on the age of the patient and the type and severity of the infection and it is administered as an intravenous bolus injection or by intravenous infusion. For intravenous bolus injection, the solution is made with sterile water and for using intravenous infusion, it is constituted with compatible infusion fluids. It is a prescription drug largely available at hospital pharmacies.

5. M/s. Zeneca Limited had launched the plaintiffs' drug 'MERONEM' in the United Kingdom in 1995 and plaintiff No. 2 had introduced it in the Indian market in March 2000. It was stated by the plaintiffs