JUDGMENT :

K.M. Thaker, J.

In present petition, the petitioners have prayed, inter alia, that:

"10(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order and/or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 25.11.2013 passed by the Ld. 6th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Jamnagar below application Ex. 15 in Regular Civil Suit No. 65/2012, and be further pleased to reject plaint of Regular Civil Suit No. 65/2012 filed by the Respondent in the Court of Ld. 6th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Jamnagar."

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 25.11.2013 passed by the learned trial Court below Exh. 15 in Regular Civil Suit No. 65 of 2012 whereby the learned trial Court rejected present petitioners' (i.e. original defendants) application (Exh. 15) which was filed under Order 7, Rule 11 (a) and (d) of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').

3. The relevant facts involved in and leading to present petition are that:

3.1 The petitioners are the original defendants and the respondent herein is the original plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.65 of 2012.

3.2 According to the details mentioned in the petition, the petitioner No.1 is a partnership firm which is engaged in the business of processing and selling edible lime ordinarily used in pan masala and/or with beetle nut and tobacco.

3.3 The petitioners claim that they are selling their product under different brand names viz. Babu, New Patel and Shree Bhole Bapa Parcel. The petitioners have further claimed that since 2006 they adopted, and started to use the mark 'Babu Chuna' and 'Babu Parcel' on the packaging of edible lime and that during the same time they also started using another mark viz. 'New Patel Parcel Chuna' and 'Shree Bhole Bapa Parcel' hereinafter referred to as 'Bhole Bapa').

3.4 The petitioners have claimed that in July 2012, the respondents herein filed a civil suit which came to be registered as Regular Civil Suit No.4 of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said first suit') at Rajkot against the petitioners on the allegation of (a) infringement of copyright; and (b) passing off. The respondents also filed application for injunction/interim relief (Exh.5) whereon the learned Court issued notice to the petitioners.

3.5 It is claimed by the petitioners that they have obtained assignment of the trademark 'Babu Chuna' from one Mrs. S. Sayali and for that purpose a deed of assignment dated 7.8.2012 (i.e. after the respondents filed the said first suit No. 4 of 2012) has been executed between said Mrs. S. Sayali and the petitioners.

3.6 The petitioners have also claimed that they filed objections against the maintainability of the said first suit (i.e. RCS No.4 of 2012).

3.7 According to the petitioners, the respondents tendered a purshis (Exh.16) in the said first suit declaring that the said suit and the injunction application is only for infringement of copyright and accordingly he (i.e. the plaintiff) will delete the averments of passing off in the plaint and injunction application and will submit amended plaint and injunction application.

3.8 The petitioners have also claimed that in September 2012, they have filed a suit for infringement of trademark against present respondent which is registered as Regular Civil Suit No.7 of 2012.

3.9 The petitioners have alleged that during the pendency of the said first suit, the respondent filed another suit at Jamnagar which is registered as Regular Civil Suit No. 65 of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said second suit').

3.10 In this background, the petitioners herein filed an application (i.e. Exh. 15) dated 19.1.2013 in the said second suit and claimed that the said second suit is not maintainable in light of Order 7, Rule 11 (a) and (d). After hearing the parties with reference to the said application (Exh. 15), the learned trial Court passed the or