Trademark infringement occurs when a mark is identical or deceptively similar to a registered trademark, potentially harming the original owner.

ORDER

1. The proceeding has been conducted through video conferencing.

I.A. Nos.15759-15762/2021

2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

3. The application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 614/2021 and I.A. No.15757/2021

4. The plaintiffs have filed this suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark, passing off, rendition of accounts of profits, dilution, delivery etc against the defendants in respect of their registered trademark DROTIN.

5. Summons of the suit and notice of application be issued to the defendants through all modes/email and whatsapp returnable on 08.03.2022 before the learned Joint Registrar.

6. The Plaintiffs are engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of pharmaceutical products under the trade mark `DROTIN'. Plaintiff No. 4 was the original registered proprietor of the trademark `DROTIN' under No.732349 in Class 05 since 03.02.1997. The plaintiff No.4 assigned all its common law rights in favour of PlaintiffNo.1 by Deed of Assignment dated 30.03.2017. The plaintiff No.1 has, thus, acquired all rights (common law and statutory), interests and titles in the trade mark `DROTIN'.

7. Plaintiff No.1 is the proprietor and owner of all intellectual property rights in the mark `DROTIN' in respect of medicinal & pharmaceutical preparations falling in Class 5. The Plaintiff No.2 manufactures and sells pharmaceutical products under the Trade Mark `DROTIN' under license from Plaintiff No.1. The Plaintiff No. 3 buys and sells the pharmaceutical goods, manufactured by plaintiff No.2, including "DROTIN". The Plaintiff No.4 markets the pharmaceutical products under the trade mark "DROTIN".

8. It is alleged defendant No.1 is engaged in the overlapping business of manufacture of medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations under the infringing trade mark `DROTAWAL'. Defendant No.2 is engaged in distribution of the medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations/products prepared by Defendant No.1 under the infringing trade mark `DROTAWAL'. Defendant No.3 is engaged in the sale of the medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations/products prepared by Defendant No.1 under the infringing trade mark `DROTAWAL'.

9. In the month of August 2021, the attention of the plaintiffs were drawn to the adoption of the mark "DROTAWAL' in respect of medicinal preparations on the part of the Defendants which is identical/deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered trade mark "DROTIN'.

10. The adoption and use of the trade mark `DROTAWAL' in relation to pharmaceutical/medicinal preparations amounts to violation of the Plaintiffs' statutory and common law right to the exclusive use constitute infringement of the trade mark Registration No.732349 under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and passing off.

11. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has shown me various orders dated 01.12.2014 passed in CS (OS) No.220/2013; dated 12.11.2014 passed in CS (OS) No.1869/2014; dated 10.11.2014 passed in CS (OS) No.1870/2014 wherein the stay has been granted for use of infringed mark DROMATOL, DROTISTAR; and DROTISPAS respectively.

12. In view of above and the submissions made would show the plaintiffs have a prima facie case and in case the defendants are not restrained ex parte, to use the trademark, the plaintiffs shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

13. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the defendants are restrained in terms of prayer clause of the injunction application.

14. Compliance of Order 39 Rule 3 of the CPC be made within ten days.

15. Upon completion of service/pleadings, the matter be listed before this Court.

I.A. No.15758/2021

16. In view of the reasons so recorded while issuing summons and notice of t