By consent of both the counsels, the appeal itself is taken up for final hearing. The appeal arises out of interlocutory proceedings in OS. No.128 of 2017 launched by the respondent complaining infringement of its trademark by the appellant.

2. The suit in OS.No.128 of 2017 has been filed by the respondent seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from in any manner infringing the copyright in SKC in English and/or Tamil trademark/logo of the plaintiff by use of the expression SKC in English and/or Tamil with/without a logo or in any other manner whatsoever, the perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from infringing the plaintiff's registered trade mark comprising the expression SKC, more particuarly by the use of the trade mark SKC either in English or in Tamil, in any way, that is similar or deceptively same registered to the trade mark of the plaintiff and other reliefs.

3. The case of the plaintiff is that it is a partnership firm carrying on business Readymades and silks in Dindigul and Salem. It owns registered trade mark in Registration No.1513383 as SKC Readymades and Registration No.1513384 as SKC S Textiles. The said registered trademarks are honestly adopted by the plaintiff s sister concern in Dindigul and in Salem. According to the plaintiff, it has earned reputation of its own and the word SKC is the most prominent and memorable part of the trading style of the business. It is also claimed that the plaintiff incurred several lakh of Rupees as advertisement charges for popularizing the trademark 'SKC' and 'SKCs' before the consumers as well as the public.

4. According to the plaintiff, the defendant attempted to commence a business using the same trademark namely SKC and titled the same as SKC textiles and readymades and attempted to open a shop at Arcot in Vellore District. Both the English and Tamil fonts used by the plaintiff in its registered trade mark were used by the defendant/appellant. Therefore the plaintiff was forced to issue a notice complaining of infringement and the requiring the defendant to desist from using the registered trade marks of the plaintiff. The defendant sent a reply on 29.05.2017 claiming that there was no attempt on its part to use the trademark of the plaintiff. It is further claimed that the actual trade name of the defendant is 'Sri Kanishk Collection' and Kanishka being the name of the daughter of one of the partners of the defendant firm, it is a bona fide user of the name. It is also contended that the plaintiff is having no business interest in Arcot Town and cannot prevent the defendant from using the abbreviation of its name, namely 'Sri Kanishka collection' as 'SKC'. Faced with such reply, the plaintiff is forced to file the above suit for injunction.

5. The defendant entered appearance through counsel and resisted the suit. After hearing the parties and analysing the evidence on record, the learned II Additional District Judge, Salem concluded that there has been an attempt on the part of the defendant who has infringed the trade mark of the plaintiff. Once the infringement is established the plaintiff would be entitled to an order of injunction without any further proof. Holding so, the learned II Additional District Judge, Salem, granted an order of injunction as prayed for in IA.No.244 of 2017. Aggrieved the defendant is on appeal before this Court.

6. I have heard Mr. K.M. Vijayan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for M/s. K.M. Vijayan and Associates, for the appellant and Mr. P.S. Raman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr. G. Rajesh Ramanathan, learned counsel for the respondent.

7. Mr. K.M. Vijayan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that there is no infringement of the trade mark of the plaintiff as alleged by the respondent/plaintiff . According to him, the letters SKC are used only as abbreviation of the full name namely 'Sri Kanishk Collection' and it is always accompanied by Silks and Readymades as wel