JUDGMENT :

Gita Mittal, J.

By this order I propose to dispose of is No. 7907/2005 filed by the plaintiff under the provisions of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking an injunction against the defendant prohibiting it from using the trade mark Hyundai in respect of which the plaintiff has asserted exclusive propriety rights.

2. M/s Hyundai Corporation is stated to be a corporation which is incorporated under the laws of Korea having its head office at Korea with liaison offices in various countries including India. The Hyundai Corporation, plaintiff herein claims to belong to the internationally famous Hyundai group of companies. Some of the other group companies include the Hyundai Heavy Industries Limited, Hyundai Motor Company, Hyundai Engineering and Construction Company Limited. It is contended that several of the Hyundai group companies are actively working in the Indian market and are engaged in the sale of various consumer products falling under various classes under the established trademark Hyundai. Apart from its manufacturing activities, it is contended that the Hyundai Group of companies is also engaged in the marketing of various goods including plant and machinery, steel, Chemicals, electrical and electronic product, ship, resource development information and tele communications etc by the trademark and name of Hyundai since 1976-77.

3. Apart from the above goods and products, the plaintiff and its associate group companies in India are stated to be carrying on its business with the trade name/trademark Hyundai in respect of motor vehicles, semi conductors, electronics and home appliances and various other goods in classes 7, 9, 11 and 12 besides other items and sectors. On account of the effort, networking promotional work, technical expertise and quality of goods, the plaintiffs have asserted long and continuous use of the trade mark and claimed that the same have acquired a trans border reputation. Hyundai as associated with the products of the plaintiff has acquired distinctiveness. Based on the plaintiffs sales-turnover in billions of rupees and expenditure of huge amounts on publicity and advertisement of its trade mark Hyundai, the plaintiffs claim tremendous reputation and goodwill attached with its products under this trademark in India as well as in other parts of the world.

4. So far as the word Hyundai is concerned, the plaintiff has contended that the same is a transliteration of a Chinese and Henkle word which in these languages means the 'present generation'. The plaintiff corporation and its associate group companies are allegedly using the trademark Hyundai since 1976. The plaintiff has pointed out that the word Hyundai has no obvious meaning and cannot be identically copied. This word being an invented word and on account of its association with the quality products of the plaintiff, is entitled to the highest degree of protection. This mark was registered as a trademark in the name of a Hyundai group of company in the republic of Korea in the year 1977. The trade mark HYUNDAI has also been registered in large number of countries across the world.

5. So far as its Indian registration is concerned, the plaintiff has claimed registration of the trademark Hyundai in international classes 7, 9, 11 and 12 in favor of the companies which form part of the Hyundai group of companies. These registrations are stated to be valid and subsisting even on date. Particulars of the status of registration in several countries all over the world has been placed before the court.

6. The suit has been necessitated as according to the plaintiff, it received information in the month of March-April, 2005 about the defendant's illegal trade activities of sale of such goods including televisions, antennas etc which are included in classes 9 and 11 and are the same as that of the plaintiff using the trademark 'Hyundai'. The plaintiff submits that as per its information, the same were being sold at v