Abdul Malik Ishak J:

By an ex parte notice of originating motion in Encl. 4 supported by an affidavit of Fazaruddin bin Ibrahim ('Fazaruddin') that was affirmed on 7 May 1994 as reflected in Encl. 3, Fazaruddin easily obtained a Trade Description Order dated 7 July 1994 (Encl. 7) before my immediate predecessor. That Trade Description Order which gave Fazaruddin exclusive use of the "ZIG ZAG" trade mark was worded in this fashion:

ADALAH DIPERINTAHKAN bahawa Cap Dagangan 'ZIG ZAG' yang dilampirkan bersama ini atau mana-mana cap dagangan yang serupa dari segi bunyi amat serupa dengan itu yang dilekatkan, dicapkan, dilabelkan atau yang kelihatan dalam mana-mana bentuk material pada barangan berikut iaitu pakaian, kemeja-kemeja, seluar, jeans, kemeja T, baju wanita atau blaus (selepas ini dirujuk sebagai 'barangan-barangan' tersebut) yang tidak dikilangkan, diedarkan, dijual atau diberi kuasa untuk dikendalikan sedemikian oleh pemohon yang dinamakan di atas akan pengilang-pengilang, pengedar-pengedar atau peruncit-peruncit mereka yang berlesen akan dianggap suatu perihal dagangan yang palsu dalam

lingkungan maksud Akta Perihal Dagangan, 1972DAN ADALAH DIPERINTAHKAN bahawa kos permohonan ini dan kos sampingan baginya dibayar oleh mana-mana pihak yang didapati melanggar hak cap dagangan tersebut.

Parkson Corporation Sdn. Bhd. ('Parkson') by way of a notice of motion dated 7 November 1994 as reflected in Encl. 10 prayed for the following orders:

(1) That Parkson be added as a respondent in this action and that the Originating Motion (it should be the Notice of Originating Motion) be amended accordingly by naming Parkson as a respondent and the matters of this proceeding be amended to include s. 45 of the Trade Marks Act 1976 .

(2) That Fazaruddin do within ten days of the grant of this order serve on Parkson or its solicitors, Messrs.

Skrine & Co. of Straits Trading Building, No: 4, Leboh Pasar Besar, 50050 Kuala Lumpur, a copy of ex parte Originating Motion (it should be the Notice of Originating Motion) dated 7 July 1994 together with copies of any affidavits and or any documents exhibited to it or related to the said Originating Motion (it should be the Notice of Originating Motion).

(3) That Parkson as a respondent to this action be at liberty to:

(a) Apply to expunge the registration of the trade mark number 92/07141 in the name of Fazaruddin; and

(b) Set aside the order of this Honourable Court dated 7 July 1994 obtained by Fazaruddin in this action.

(c) Have the damages assessed by the Registrar.

(4) That the costs of and occasioned by the application be costs in the cause; and

(5) Such further or other orders as this Honourable Court thinks fit.

The notice of motion in Encl. 10 was supported by an affidavit of Yong Boon Sen (Encl. 9) affirmed on 1 November 1994 but was filed on 7 November 1994. On 14 January 1995, Brian Komathi, the learned Counsel for Fazaruddin, conceded that prayers (1) and (2) of Encl. 10 should be ordered in favour of Parkson and orders to that effect were made by me as reflected in Encl. 23. The date for hearing of prayer three of Encl. 10 was scheduled to be heard on 7 February 1995. In the meantime, Fazaruddin affirmed an affidavit-in-reply on 6 March 1995 as reflected in Encl. 13. By way of a reply, Parkson through Law Boon Eng affirmed an affidavit-in-reply on 2 May 1995 as seen in Encl. 15 where Law Boon Eng adopted the contents of the affidavit of Yong Boon Sen in Encl. 9. Fazaruddin took a swift action and filed an affidavit-in-reply to Encl. 15 by affirming that affidavit-in-reply on 29 June 1995 as reflected in Encl. 16. Parkson filed a further affidavit affirmed by Law Boon Eng on 7 December 1995 (Encl. 27) and Fazaruddin replied by way of an affidavit affirmed on 19 January 1996 as seen in Encl. 29.

By summons-in-chambers in Encl. 20 dated 19 August 1995, and supported by an affidavit of Law Boon Eng affirmed on 17 August 1995 in Encl. 19 Parkson sought to cross-examine