SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Raj) 1992

BELA M.TRIVEDI
Rathi Irrigation Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
M/s Aaram Plastics Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:Prateek Kasliwal, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mahendra Shandilya, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the appeal is decided finally at the admission stage.

2. The present appeal arises out of the order dated 11.08.2010 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge No.4, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Civil Misc. Application No.3/2009 in Suit No.1/2009, whereby the trial court has dismissed the application of the appellant-plaintiff seeking temporary injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 of CPC.

3. The appellant-plaintiff has filed the suit, alleging interalia that the appellant company is incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading and sale of agricultural products like H.D.P.E. pipes and sprinkler systems and other spare parts since 1998, for which the appellant was using the trademark 'Jindal'. According to the appellant, the said trademark was registered under the Trademark Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act") with the registration No.1191728, and therefore, the appellant had an excursive right to use the said trademark. It is further case of the appellant-plaintiff that the trademark ce








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top