The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of prior user rights in trade marks, the principles governing the infringement of passing off, and the need to prevent unfair trade practices.

1. This application is filed seeking an order of ad interim injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from passing off their services and business as and for the services and business of the applicant pending disposal of the suit.

2. The brief averment found in the application is as follows:-

The applicant Future Logistics Private Limited is involved in the Logistics Services including freight forwarding, consolidation, warehousing and customs clearance. The applicant had coined and adopted the trade name/service mark Future Logistics in the year 2004 in respect of Logistics Services. Future Logistics is significantly distinct and uniquely identified by the trade and public who associate the mark with the applicants Logistics Services alone. The applicant has already filed an application seeking registration of the Trade Mark in clause 39. Future Logistics has gained immense reputation and goodwill among various corporate houses and other commercial entities within and outside the Sate of Tamil Nadu. The applicant had substantial sales turnover for the last few years in respect of their Logistics Services. They have spent substantial sums of money every year towards advertisement and sales promotion activities. In December 2008, the applicant became aware that the respondent is running the business of providing logistics services under the trade name Future Logistics Solutions Private Limited. The use of the identical trade mark Future Logistics Solutions would confuse the patrons of the of the applicant and also other members of public. The slavish imitation attempted is nothing but a case of misrepresentation and amounts to unfair trade practice. The applicant is the prior adopter and continuous user of the trade name Future Logistics. The adoption of the mark Future Logistics by the respondent is dishonest. Hence, the prayer for the relief as sought for.

3. The averment in brief found in the counter of the respondent reads as follows:-

The respondent group adopted the word Future in and around October 2005. It had incorporated around 27 Companies by using and adopting the trade name Future as a prefix. On 3. 2006, the respondent Future Logistics Solutions Limited was incorporated as a Company under the said name. Prior use, per se, would not be sufficient for the purpose of establishing a reputation. The applicants date of incorporation is less than six months prior to respondents group adopting the word Future and calling itself "Future Group". The adoption of the said name by the respondent was honest and transparent. The turnover of the respondent during the year ending March 2007 and 2008 was Rs.112.94 crores. The respondent has been carrying on business extensively and openly throughout India under the present name. In the absence of any deception, no action would lie for passing off. The respondent is one of the Companies that belong to the Future Group. The Company was primarily under the business of manufacturing and retailing of garments. It had diversified into other avenues of business. Prior to 2006, the business of Logistics was originally carried on by the Logistics Division of M/s.Pantaloon Retail (India) Limited. Since the business of the Logistics grew by leaps and bounds, the Future Group has set up and incorporated a Company to exclusively carry on the business of Logistics. Future Logistics have developed substantial goodwill and reputation and have come to be associated in the minds of the Indian public only with the Future Group led by its flagship company M/s.Pantaloon Retail. Therefore, the respondent would submit that the application deserves dismissal.

4. The applicant Company Future Logistics Private Limited was incorporated with the Registrar of Companies, Chennai on 16th December 2004. The respondent Company Future Logistics Solutions Limited was incorporated on 3. 2006. There is no denial of the fact that the applicant is the prior user of the mark Future Logistics Pr