ORDER

% I.A. 14318/2022 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)

1. This application has been filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC as part of accompanying suit seeking permanent injunction restraining defendant and all those acting for and on his behalf from manufacturing, selling, using, displaying, advertising, importing, exporting or in any other manner dealing with impugned goods and products bearing the Page 2/25 trademark/device/label and or any other trade mark/label/device identical with or deceptively similar to plaintiffs trademark/label/device ‘TIGER’/ .

2. Notice in the application was issued on 6th September, 2022. On 29th February, 2024, when submissions were heard on behalf of counsel for plaintiff, a set of additional documents filed on 1st March, 2023 were adverted to. However, as the counsel for defendant stated that he did not have a copy of the same, it was directed that documents be supplied to defendant, despite the fact that they were filed one year prior.

3. On 29th February, 2024, two photographs were adverted to by counsel for plaintiff to show that in 2014, defendant was actually an employee of plaintiff, who had already been using the registered trademark Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Page 3/25 ‘TIGER’ with respect to their products i.e. pipes used for agricultural purposes.

4. On 8th April, 2014, further submissions were heard on behalf of parties. A query was put to counsel for defendant by the Court whether the person in photographs was defendant himself or not. To this, counsel for defendant did not make any statement. Accordingly, directions were issued for defendant to appear in Court on 10th April, 2024, as also, to file an affidavit in this regard.

5. On 10th April 2024, an affidavit was filed by defendant/Mr. Jasmer stating that he had seen the coloured photographs that plaintiff had placed on record which were taken from the surveillance camera installed in the premises of plaintiff. Further, he confirmed that he was the person in those photographs. He did not accede to the genuineness of the said surveillance camera recording, including the date, but did state that the image appearing in the video showed his presence.

Submissions on behalf of Plaintiff

6. Counsel for plaintiff has made the following submissions in support of his application:

6.1 The first application No. 3746492 for trademark ‘TIGER’ (device)/ Page 4/25 was applied on 6th February, 2018 in class 17, claiming user from 17th June, 2003. The said mark was registered on 5th July, 2021 in favour of plaintiff.

6.2 Yet another registration was sought by plaintiff in class 19 vide application No. 3746494, with the same user detail being 17th June, 2003, applied on 6th February, 2018 and granted on 27th June, 2021.

6.3 On 29th May 2019, copyright registration vide A-129594/2019, was also granted in favour of plaintiff in artistic work in said device, with the first year of publication being 2003 in India.

6.4 Plaintiff became proprietor of said trademark and has been an honest and bona fide user of the same, in course of its trade for product of agricultural pipes and has built up enormous goodwill and reputation in the said mark.

6.5 Turnover claimed by plaintiff in the said mark is as under:

Page 5/25

6.6 Defendant had been an employee of plaintiff, but owing to misconduct and theft committed by him at the premises of plaintiff, defendant was removed from his job in February, 2017. Therefore, defendant was well aware of plaintiff’s marks and other details of his business.

6.7 A complaint was filed on 23rd February, 2017 by Mr. Sanjay Arora of plaintiff company with SHO of PS Samaipur Badli, stating that defendant Digitally Signed Page 6/25 was doing business of ‘TIGER KISSAN PIPES’ etc. under ‘TIGER BRAND’. FIR bearing No. 459 dated 2nd June, 2018 was registered under Sections 408 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) against defendant. Allegation was made therein tha