Sri Sai Agencies Pvt. Ltd. v. Chintala Rama Rao

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1998 Supreme(Online)(AP) 7

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
II Additional Judge, J
Sri Sai Agencies Pvt. Ltd. v. Chintala Rama Rao

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: strenuously contended counsel
For the Respondents: strenuously supported counsel

Table of Content
1. hearing and challenged order for injunction (Para 1 , 2)
2. contentions from both parties regarding trademark usage (Para 3 , 6 , 7)
3. factual background on plaintiff's trademark usage (Para 4 , 5)
4. judicial observations on passing off and trademark distinctiveness (Para 8 , 9)

1. Though the matter was earlier posted for consideration of the vacate stay petition but on 19-6-97, both the counsel submitted that the main matter (i.e. appeal) itself could be heard and finally disposed of. Accordingly the appeal itself was heard on merits.

2. This is defendant's appeal challenging the order of the II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad dt. 13-12-96 in I.A. No. 649/96 in O.S. No. 14/96. By the impugned order the Court below granted an injunction in favour of the respondent / plaintiff restraining the appellant / defendant from using the trade mark in question i.e. "Mathurag Ghee" with the pictoral device of Lord Krishna in sitting posture.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant strenuously contended that the impugned judgment and order of the lower Court is illegal and without jurisdiction and the Court below has not applied its mind to the fac