JUDGMENT

I.A. 22385/2022 (O-XXXIX R-1 & 2 of the CPC)

1. By way of the present judgment, I shall decide the application filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

CASE SET UP IN THE PLAINT

2. The case set up by the plaintiff in the plaint is as follows:

2.1. The plaintiff is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mayo Clinic, a world-famous charitable organisation incorporated under the laws of the United States of America. The origins of the plaintiff can be traced back to an American surgeon, Dr. William Worrall Mayo and his two sons. Dr. Mayo opened the first private clinic in Rochester in the 1880s and his sons established Mayo Clinic in 1914.

2.2. The plaintiff is a leading internationally known medical center recognized for, inter alia, providing medical care through a diverse physician-led team of people involved in offering clinical, educational, diagnostic and research services in a unified multi-campus system. The plaintiff owns and operates campuses under the trade mark/name Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota; Jacksonville, Florida; and Phoenix, Arizona and employs approximately 73,000 personnel comprising of physicians, scientists and health staff.

2.3. The plaintiff's gross revenue under the mark "MAYO" in the year 2021 was around USD 15.7 billion which demonstrates goodwill and reputation under the mark `MAYO'.

2.4. The plaintiff has been regarded as the leading medical centre for research and specialist education and has garnered substantial goodwill and reputation over the years, including being named the `#1 hospital nationwide' by U.S. News and World Report.

2.5. The plaintiff has received widespread exposure and acceptance in the field of health and medicine in India on account of news and health reports of the plaintiff being regularly published and cited in Indian newspapers, magazines and online publications.

2.6. From 2014 to 2022, there have been over 33 crore sessions by Indian users on the plaintiff's website, www.mayoclinic.org and over 10 lakh sessions by Indian users on the plaintiff's website, www.mayo.edu.

2.7. The plaintiff is the proprietor of the trademark MAYO and MAYO formative marks in relation to the goods and services offered by the plaintiff in Classes 16, 41, 42 and 44 and other classes including a registration for the standalone word mark `MAYO' dating back to 1992 in India, details of which are given in paragraph 22 of the plaint. The legal proceedings certificates for the plaintiff's trademarks have been filed along with the plaint. `MAYO' is also the plaintiff's house mark and constitutes the essential and dominant part of the plaintiff's trading style and the domain names for its websites www.mayoclinic.org, www.mayo.edu and www.mayoclinic.com.

2.8. The plaintiff has also obtained registration of the trade mark `MAYO' and `MAYO' formative marks in over 85 countries.

2.9. Defendant no.1, Bodhisatva Charitable Trust is a non-government trust established on 11th July, 2000 under the Indian Trust Act, 1882 providing dissemination of education in the medical field and providing help for medical and surgical treatment. Defendant no.2, Mayo Medical Centre Private Limited, a company incorporated in 1995, is operating a multi-speciality health care centre under the name `Mayo Medical Centre'. Defendant no.3, Mayo Medical Centre is a super-specialty hospital established by the defendant no.1. Defendant no.4, Mayo Institute of Medical Sciences was established by the defendant no.1 in 2012 and offers medical courses. Defendant no.5, Mayo School of Nursing has been established by the defendant no.3 in 2003. Defendant no.6 is a clinic/hospital operated under the name `Mayo Hospital'. Defendants no.7 and 8 are the Directors of the defendant no.4 and trustees of the defendant no.1 and are also believed to be responsible for the management and operations of the defendants no.2 to 6.

2.10. The plaintiff became aware of the dishonest adoption o