The case establishes that a registered trademark owner is entitled to injunctive relief against a party using a deceptively similar mark, prioritizing consumer protection and trademark integrity.

1. This Motion is for an interlocutory injunction in a trade mark infringement and passing off action. This Court has already granted leave to the Plaintiff under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent to combine the two causes of action.

2. The Plaintiff, Kalpataru Properties Pvt. Ltd., carries on business as builders and developers. The Plaintiff was established in the year 1975 in the name of Kalpataru Construction Pvt. Ltd. The name was first changed in 1982 to Kalpataru Construction Overseas Pvt. Ltd. and later in 2006 to its present name. The word 'Kalpataru' throughout remained the integral part of its corporate name. The Plaintiff claims to be a flagship company of Kalpataru Group of Companies, which carry on diverse activities including property development and management, infrastructure projects, warehousing, logistics, etc. The Plaintiff has allowed the various group companies and entities to use the word 'Kalpataru' as part of their corporate or trading names. The Plaintiff has been using the trade mark consisting of a device of a tree and the word 'Kalpataru' written in a stylized manner since 1977. The Plaintiff holds a registration for marks (i) 'Kalpataru' written in a stylized manner and (ii) 'Kalpataru' so written with the device of a tree in Class 16 for paper and paperboard, cardboard articles, printed matter, etc. as of 14 July 2003 and also in Class 19 for building and road making materials for use in civil engineering since 14 July 2003, and in Class 36 in respect of insurance and real estate affairs included therein and Class 37 in respect of building construction, repairs, installation services since 21 January 2004 and also as a word mark 'Kalpataru' in Class 37 in respect of building construction, etc. since 25 October 2011. Besides these marks, the Plaintiff also holds registrations of the mark 'Kalpataru' (Label) in black and white as well as colour and is also an applicant of the word mark 'Kalpataru 'under various other Classes. The mark has been extensively advertised and has come to be associated with the Plaintiff and its group companies. The mark 'Kalpataru' is also included in a list of well known trademarks maintained by the Registrar of Trade Marks.

3. It is the grievance of the Plaintiff that in or about May 2003, the Plaintiff received several inquiries about a certain project at Agra - Mathura Highway in Uttar Pradesh. Upon inquiries, the Plaintiff learnt that this was a housing project undertaken by the Defendants with the use of the Plaintiff's business name and registered trade mark 'Kalpataru' or a mark deceptively similar thereto. It is the Plaintiff's case that the members of the trade and ordinary public were misled into believing that the project belonged to a group company of the Plaintiff or was somehow connected with the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff also came across articles in print and electronic / web media about some wrongdoing on the part of, and financial complaints about, Defendant No. 1 and its directors dealing in the business name and with the use of the mark. The Plaintiff, thereupon, addressed a cease and desist notice to Defendant No. 1 and its directors, followed by a reminder. There was no response from the Defendants. It is the grievance of the Plaintiff that not only did the Defendants not desist from using the mark 'Kalptaru', but after the receipt of the cease and desist notice, made several new application for registration of the mark 'Kalptaru' in different Classes including Classes 36 and 37. (These applications are being opposed by the Plaintiff and the matters are pending before the Registry.) The Plaintiff, in the premises, has approached th