( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11. 2. 2000 passed by the City Civil Judge, ahmedabad, below exh. 5/6 in Notice of Motion in Civil Suit no. 1952/1999, whereby the defendants- appellants were restrained from manufacturing and marketing their products i. e. flour mills (Ghar Ghanti) by using the word NIMA till hearing and final disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) THE respondents-original plaintiffs filed Civil Suit No. 1952/1999 for a declaration and permanent injunction. The case of the respondents-original plaintiffs is as under:2. 1 The plaintiff no. 1 is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the indian Companies Act, 1956 and plaintiff no. 2 is a Trust registered under the provisions of the Indian Trusts Act. Plaintiff no. 2 is the owner and proprietor of the trade mark NIRMA and the same trade mark has been assigned in favour of plaintiff no. l by way of assignment deed. The assignment deed is filed for registration under the provisions of the Trade Marks act and plaintiff no. l is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing various consumer products in India and elsewhere. 2. 2 The plaintiffs predecessor-in-title started manufacturing and marketing detergent powder, detergent cake and other products in India and elsewhere. The word nirma has been coined and invented from the name of NIRUPAMA, daughter of Smt. Shantaben K. Patel, a partner of the said partnership firm and as trade mark NIRMA has been registered. The same is continuously used in various packing materials for different products, i. e. soap, detergent powder, detergent cake, cleaning preparations, etc. . ,2. 3 Trade mark NIMA is also used and got registered under the Trade Marks Act in respect of various classes, i. e. like spices, match box and other consumer items. Plaintiffs products are sold throughout india and the name NIRMA has acquired reputation and goodwill in the market. The plaintiffs have applied for registration of similar names NIRMAL, NIMA and also applied for exclusive right to use the same word. According to them, the plaintiffs have got some of the registration which includes registration of mark NIMA. The plaintiff no. 1 is registered at Registration no. 422839 in respect of the goods covered in Class 7, and therefore, the use of the same or any other identical or deceptively similar by any other person more particularly by the defendants amounts to infringement to the plaintiffs trade marks. Trade mark NIMA is also registered bearing Registration No. 396185/b of 1982. 2. 4 It is alleged that the appellants- defendants have adopted and started using the word NIMA for marketing their flour mills. Therefore, Notice was served on 22. 9. 1998 calling upon the defendants to stop using the trade mark NIMA. The defendants replied to the Notice on 07. 10. 1998. Again, another notice was served to which there was no reply. According to the plaintiffs, by using the word NIMA the defendants are creating confusion and deception in the mind of general public because the word NIMA is identical and deceptively similar to the plaintiff no. 1s very popular trade mark nirma. However, the defendants declined to stop using the word NIMA for their products. Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs preferred the aforesaid Civil Suit. In the suit proceedings, notice of motion was taken out at Exhs. 5/6. 2. 5 The Trial Court after hearing the parties passed an order on 11. 2. 2000, whereby the plaintiffs-defendants were restrained by an order of temporary injunction from manufacturing and marketing their products, i. e. flour mills (Ghar Ghanti) by using the word NIMA till hearing and final disposal of the suit. 2. 6 It is against the aforesaid order the present appeal has been filed by the original defendants.

( 3 ) MR. P M Thakkar learned Senior counsel appearing with Mr. Premal S. Rachh and Mr. Y M Thakkar learned advocates for the appellants has submitted that the appellants are using the mark n