Point in Issue :
Whether a composite suit as in the case is maintainable.

M.R. Shah, J.—Present Appeal from Order under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure is arising out of the impugned order dated 02.03.2007 passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below Exhibit 6 and 7 in Civil Suit No. 1735 of 2006 by which the learned Chamber Judge has allowed the said Notice of Motion granting injunction in favour of the respondent herein - original plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as ‘the plaintiff’) and against the appellant herein - original defendant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the defendant’) restraining the defendants, its proprietor, partners and directors, as the case may be, their servants, agents, dealers, stockists and distributors from manufacturing, marketing, advertising, selling and exporting its tablets used in plain, inflammation and fever under the impugned trade-mark BOLAREN along with its copyrights subsist in its artwork of the label packages etc. and any other trade-mark along with its copyrights which may be identical and/or deceptively similar as that of the plaintiff’s registered trade-mark DOLAREN along with its copyrights subsist in its artwork of the label, packages etc. and they are also further restrained from committing an act of passing off goods, from selling and exporting tablets used in pain, inflammation and fever as the goods of the plaintiff under the alleged trade-mark BOLAREN along with its copyrights subsist in its artwork of the label, packages etc. and they are also restrained from reproducing the copyrights consisting in the artwork in its trade-mark BOLAREN having identical style, get-up, layout and design as that of the plaintiff and they are also restrained from committing an act of infringement of the copyrights.

2. Respondent herein - original plaintiff had instituted Civil Suit No. 1735 of 2006 against the appellant - original defendant in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad for infringement of their trade-mark ‘DOLAREN’ and for infringement of copyrights while passing of aforesaid trade-mark. It is the case on behalf of the plaintiff that the plaintiff’s company is inter-alia engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing and selling and exporting medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations and having its office at Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. The suit produce of the plaintiff is in the form of tablet under the trade-mark ‘DOLAREN’ with the artistic work in its copyright. Said trade-mark ‘DOLAREN’ and the copyright consisting the artistic work in its label, packages etc. is adopted and started using by the plaintiff’s company who is using the trade-mark with the copyright consist in the artwork of label, packages etc. since 1998 continuously, extensively, exclusively and openly. That the defendant’s company inter-alia seems to be engaged in the business of manufacturing, marketing, selling and exporting medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations and the defendant is also manufacturing, selling and exporting an identical product under deceptive similar trade-mark ‘BOLAREN’ and copyright consisting the artistic work in its label, packages etc. which is an identical or rather ditto-to-ditto same as that of the plaintiff’s copyright subsist in its artwork consist in its packaging and also the trade-mark ‘BOLAREN’ is deceptively similar to that of the plaintiff’s trade-mark ‘DOLAREN’. It is also the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff is very well-known and a prime manufacturer and merchant of the medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations. The product of the plaintiff has become very famous and have acquired the tremendous reputation amongst the public for its excellent quality and in consequences thereof a very valuable goodwill accumulated therein. It the case on behalf of the plaintiff that to distinguish its product from the products of the other manufacturers, the plaintiff have adopted and using the trade-mark ‘DOLAREN’ and also the copyright consisting in its artwork i.e. particular style, get-up, layout, design