R. Jayasimha Babu, J.

1. The plaintiffs have filed this appeal against the order declining to grant leave to sue. The suit was for an injunction to prevent infringement as also to prevent passing off of the defendant's product as that of the plaintiffs, the product being a tablet name as 'FESOVIT'. There is no dispute about the fact that this is intended for the average consumer to whom such goods were sold through chemical shops. The defendant is based in Bombay, whereas one of the two plaintiffs has an office at Madras.

2. The plaintiff produced the invoices under which it had purchased the product manufactured by the defendant, such purchase having been made place at Madras. The purchase was effected from chemists who normally deal in medicines. This tablet, it is stated, is an iron tonic and is sold through chemists and druggists shop. The fact that it is manufactured by the defendant was not disputed by the defendant.

3. The only ground on which the defendant wanted the leave not to be granted was that the plaintiffs had not stated in the plaint that the defendant has a distributor in the city of Chennai for the product manufactured by them. The fact that the product