The court ruled that the defendant's use of KIMIXIDE infringes the plaintiff's registered trademark AMIXIDE, being deceptively similar and likely to cause consumer confusion.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the ORIGINAL SIDE RULES and Order VII Rule 1 of the C.P.C. read with Sections 27 , 28, 29, 134 and 135 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 for the following reliefs:

(a) A permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, its distributors, stockists, servants, agents, retailers, legal representatives, job-workers, manufacturers or any other person claiming under it from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, advertising directly or indirectly dealing in medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations infringing Plaintiffs registered trademark AMIXIDE by use of deceptively similar trademark KIMIXIDE or any mark deceptively similar to Plaintiff's registered trademark AMIXIDE or in any other manner whatsoever;

(b) A permanent injunction restraining the Defendant, its distributors, stockists, servants, agents, retailers, legal representatives job-workers, manufacturers or any other person claiming under it from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, advertising directly or indirectly dealing in medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations under the trademark KIMIXIDE or any other trademark that is identical and/or deceptively similar as that of the Plaintiffs registered trademark AMIXIDE and/or use similar packaging as that of the plaintiff's products under the mark AMIXIDE so as to pass off the Defendant's medicinal preparations as and for the medicinal preparations of the Plaintiff and/or in any other manner whatsoever connected with the Plaintiff;

(c) The Defendant be ordered to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as liquidated damages for committing acts of infringement against Plaintiff's registered trademark so as to pass off its products as and for the Plaintiff's products;

(d) The Defendant be ordered and decreed to deliver up for destruction to the Plaintiff all the preparations, dies, blocks, labels, packaging either filled or empty, brochures, leaflets, pamphlets, hand bills, hoardings, wall posters, calendars, carry bags, stationery items and such other sales promotional materials bearing and/or containing the impugned trademark KIMIXIDE;

(e) A preliminary decree be passed in favour of the Plaintiff directing the Defendant to render accounts of profits made by it by use of the trademarks KIMIXIDE which is identical and/or deceptively similar and a final decree be passed in favour of the Plaintiff for the amount of profits found to have been made by the Defendant after the latter has rendered accounts;

(f) For costs of the entire proceedings.)

The suit has been filed for infringement, passing off and for damages. The plaintiff has also sought for destruction of the alleged infringed products and also for preliminary decree to render accounts of the products alleged to have been manufactured by the defendant by using a deceptively similar trademark of the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff claims to be a reputed pharmaceutical Company with presence in India and in many parts of the World. They claim that they have registered several trademarks for their pharmaceutical preparations under different brand names and in the course of their regular business, they claim that in or about April, 1984, they adopted