Back
KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA
MMI Tabacco Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Iftikhar Alam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. Heard Shri T.P. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Arvind Srivastava and Shri Mohammad Waseem, learned counsel appearing on behalf of plaintiff-appellants and Shri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Santosh Kumar Tripathi and Shri Udyan Nandan, learned counsel appearing for defendant-respondent.
THE APPEAL
2. The instant appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been preferred by the plaintiffs-appellants of Original Suit No. 20 of 2022 (M/s M.M.I. Tobacco Pvt. Ltd. and another vs Iftikhar Alam) challenging the order dated 30.01.2024, whereby the District Judge, Varanasi has rejected their injunction application (Paper No. 6-C). Further prayer made is to allow the injunction application dated 25.08.2022.
PLAINTIFFS’ CASE
3. The said Original Suit was filed by M/s M.M.I. Tobacco Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Mohd. Nazish, as plaintiff No.1 and Mohd. Nazish in his personal capacity, as plaintiff No.2, against the defendant--respondent Iftikhar Alam under Sections 29, 134, 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1956 with the averments that plaintiff No.
The court emphasized the necessity of establishing a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury for granting injunctions in trademark disputes.
The findings recorded in the order granting or refusing injunction are to be looked into only in connection with the three basic ingredients, i.e. prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irrepa....
The court emphasized the importance of disclosing material facts and prior use of trademarks in obtaining injunction orders.
The registration of a trademark may contain territorial restrictions, and any infringement can only be alleged within the specified territory. Suppression of material facts and misleading statements ....
The failure to renew a trademark registration leads to abandonment, allowing subsequent users to claim rights.
In a passing off action, a plaintiff cannot obtain an injunction against a registered trademark proprietor whose adoption and registration of the mark predates the plaintiff's user, especially when t....
The court confirmed that a written agreement prevails over claims of oral licenses in matters of trademark use, reiterating that determinable contracts cannot be enforced for specific performance und....
A trade mark recognized as well-known under the Trade Marks Act is protected against concurrent use by others regardless of the class of goods, particularly when evidence of rightful prior use and bo....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
