( 1 ) APPELLANT, Cadbury India Limited, having lost the legal battle against respondent SM Dyechem Limited in the lower Court, has knocked the doors of this Court by filing this Appeal from Order with the aids of the provisions of Order 43 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code (the Code for short), whereunder it challenged the order dated 23. 3. 1999 recorded below Ex. 6 - Notice of Motion - in Civil Suit No. 852 of 1999, by learned Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, whereby he granted injunction against the appellant in terms of para 21 (A) and (B) of the application restraining the appellant from infringing the respondents trade mark "piknik" which is registered under the provisions of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (the Act for short hereinafter) vide trade mark No. 505532 and to pass off the appellants goods i. e. , chocolate, chocolate preparations, wafer biscuits and/or the like goods as and for that of respondents, till the disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) PRESENT appellant is the original defendant whereas present respondent is the original plaintiff and hence for the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff and the defendant respectively.

( 3 ) BEFORE highlighting the nature of controversy posed for determination of this Court in this Appeal from Order, it is necessary to advert to a few but relevant facts of the case.

( 4 ) IN nutshell the plaintiffs case is as under:4. 1. PLAINTIFF, SM Dyechem Limited, is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is carrying on their business of manufacturing and marketing of chemicals and chemical products and food products, including ready to eat snacks, such as potato crisps, potato chips, potato wafers, corn puffs, preparations made from rice and rice flour, preparations made from cereal, etc. 4. 2. DEFENDANT, Cadbury India Limited, is also a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act and is carrying on business of manufacturing and selling chocolate preparations/wafer biscuits, snacks, etc. 4. 3. IN 1988, the plaintiff started business in the field of processing of food products, more particularly known as ready to eat snacks as mentioned hereinabove in their food division known as "sm Foods". In 1989, the plaintiffs said division developed and adopted a trade mark, in the name and style of "piknik", in relation to ready to eat snacks processed by them. 4. 4. AFTER adoption of the said trade mark "piknik", the plaintiff commenced use of the said trade mark in relation to ready to eat snacks processed by them and marketed the goods in the name and style of "piknik". 4. 5. THE plaintiff is the lawful proprietor of the said trade mark since February 1989 and, therefore, on 17. 2. 1989 the Food Division of the plaintiff applied for registration of a label mark, containing the word "piknik", under the Act, in class 29 in respect of preserved, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables, etc. under application No. 505531b. The plaintiff also applied for registration of the said trade mark in class 30 in respect of tea, coffee, etc. under application No. 505532. The plaintiff also applied for registration of the said trade mark in class 32 in respect of beverages, beers, mineral and aerated waters, soda water, etc. under application No. 505533. 4. 6. THE aforesaid three applications were processed and pursuant to the orders passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks, the plaintiff became the registered proprietor of said trade mark "piknik" under Nos. 505531b, 505532 and 505533 in Classes 29, 30 and 32 respectively. Since the plaintiff became the proprietor of the said trade mark, they are entitled to use exclusively the said trade mark in relation to the aforesaid goods and the plaintiff has a right to restrain others from using the same and/or similar trade mark. 4. 7. IT was further case of the plaintiff that since 1989, on an extensive and e