The court established that use of deceptively similar marks constitutes trademark infringement and warranted a permanent injunction to protect the Plaintiff's well-known mark.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff - Astral Poly Technik Limited seeking declaration and permanent injunction restraining the infringement of trade mark, passing off, unfair competition, damages, delivery up, etc. The case of the Plaintiff is that it has adopted the trade mark `ASTRAL', both in word form and logo form in respect of pipes, parts and fittings thereof in Class 17, for use in plumbing, sewage and drainage, agriculture, surface drainage, industrial use, fire protection, cable protection, urban infrastructure, insulation, adhesives, and ancillary products such as clams, hangers, sanitizers, etc. The Plaintiff adopted the trade mark `ASTRAL), both as part of its corporate name as also its trade mark, in the year 1996. Since then, the Plaintiff has extensively used the said mark for high quality products of its manufacture and sale. The Plaintiff is also stated to have been awarded various awards and accolades for innovation in the field of plumbing and drainage systems, which are detailed in the plaint.

3. The trade mark `ASTRAL', though a dictionary word, was adopted as an arbitrary mark in the year 1996, and its variants have been registered in Classes 17, 19, 11, amongst others. The trade mark `ASTRAL' is also protected by the Plaintiff against misuser. The Plaintiff claims extensive goodwill owing to sales of more than Rs.2000 crores in the year 2019-20 and more than Rs.70 crores spent on promotion and advertisement. The Statement of Revenue and Sales Promotion Expenditure of the Plaintiff has been set out below:

STATEMENT OF REVENUE & SALES PROMOTION EXPENDITURE

4. The website of the Plaintiff is www.astralpipes.com, which has been registered by the Plaintiff for promoting and advertising its goods. According to the Plaintiff, the mark `ASTRAL' is also a well-known mark in view of the extensive usage and registrations, which are held by it.

5. The Defendant No.1 - M/s. Dharti Pipe is a partnership concern of Shri Narendrabhai B. Umretiya and Defendant No.2 - Shri Maheshbhai G. Gajera, who are stated to be the partners of M/s. Dharti Pipe, which is using the mark `ARSTAL' in respect of pipes and parts and fittings thereof. Defendant No.3 - M/s. Shree Vishnu Electric Paint & Hardware and Defendant No.4 - M/s. Aggarwal Sanitary Store, are the retail shops of Defendant Nos.1 & 2.

6. Mr. Gupta ld. Counsel submits that the Plaintiff is stated to have filed a suit being Trademark Suit No.9/2019 before the District Court, Surat, Gujarat in August, 2019 seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendant No.1 and 2 from passing off their goods under the deceptively similar mark `ARSTAL'. In the said suit, as per ld counsel an ex parte interim injunction was granted against the Defendant Nos.1 & 2. Since the Defendants did not enter appearance despite service, the injunction was confirmed till the disposal of the suit. However, as per ld. Counsel, the Defendants continued to manufacture and sell their products under the impugned mark. Thereafter, it was realized by the Plaintiff that the Defendants were also selling their products under the ident