1) The present suit has been filed for infringement of trademark and passing off. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of gauges, pressure, temperature, temperature gauges, temperature switches etc in the name of Minco India Private Limited and is using the mark “Minco India” in respect of its goods and services since the year 1982. The Plaintiff applied for registration of its trade mark “MINCO INDIA” on 5th June 2023 with user claim of 6th October 1982 and has secured registration in Class 9. It is stated that owing to the extensive and continuous use of its trademark, the Plaintiff has garnered reputation and goodwill among the public and trade members. To substantiate the goodwill and reputation, the sales turnover of the Plaintiff from the year 1989-1990 onwards duly certified by the chartered accountant is placed on record.

2) It is pleaded that in the first week of February 2024, the Plaintiff found that the Defendant is manufacturing and offering for sale identical goods and services using identical mark “MINCO”. The Plaintiff had earlier received information about the use of the mark “MINCO” but could not specifically find the goods and services offered by Defendant. On 14th February, an email was received by the Plaintiff from third-party complaining about defective flow nozzle at which point of time the Plaintiff realised that the defective product has been supplied by the defendant. The search of trade mark registry revealed the Defendant’s application for registration of the device mark “MINCO” to which trade mark registry has raised objection on 18th July 2022 under section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (for short “T.M.Act”) to which the Defendant has filed counter statement on 10th August 2022. It is stated that the use of an identical or similar trademark will lead to confusion and the defendant has infringed the plaintiff’s registered trademark by use of identical trade mark “MINCO”. Hence the present suit.

3) The Defendant initially filed a limited affidavit in reply dated 30 September 2024 raising preliminary objection on the ground of gross suppression of material and relevant facts and documents in the plaint. It is stated that the purported date of knowledge of the Plaintiff as stated is false to the Plaintiff's own knowledge as the Plaintiff is aware of the use by the Defendant of the trademark “MINCO” since the year 2012. The family history of incorporation of various companies including the Plaintiff and Defendant by Manohar Mahadeo Kulkarni, who is the father of Amarendra and Raghvendra, the directors of the plaintiff and defendant company respectively is set out. It is stated that by reason of partition/family arrangement, initially Amarendra and Raghvendra were appointed as director of the plaintiff as well as of the Defendant. A change of the Defendant Company’s name from Tivim Instruments, Company Pvt Limited to Minco (India) Flow Elements Pvt Limited was caused with consent of Plaintiff under board resolution dated 2nd July, 2012 and fresh certificate of incorporation was issued on 1st September 2012. As per the family arrangement and post an extraordinary general body meeting of Defendant Company, the name of the Defendant company was changed to the present Minco (India) Flow Elements Private Limited with consent of Plaintiff.

4) It is contended that Plaintiff and Defendant are part of MMK group promoted General Instruments Consortium/General Group of Companies (GICON) and all all names, marks, assets etc is the property of GICON which was spearheaded by the family patriarch Manohar. Reliance is placed on resolution of GICON to show its complete control over the functioning of the group companies including the plaintiff and the defendant company. From 2012 till mid-2022, the Plaintiff and Defendant both had their respective offices in the same premises. It is contended that the Will executed by Manohar led to dispute between Amarendra and Raghvendra. On 15th December, 2015, Amarendra and R