N. DINESH KUMAR Vs. SHWETA KHANDELWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a miscellaneous first appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( CPC , for brevity) calling in question the legality and correctness of the order dated 21.12.2020 on I.A.Nos.2 to 4 filed by the respondent herein in O.S.No.6811/2019 passed by the learned XVIII Additional City Civil Judge (CCH No.10) Bengaluru City.

(2.) The defendant is the appellant and the plaintiff is the respondent herein. During the course of this judgment, parties shall be referred to as per their ranks before the Court below.

(3.) The plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.6811/2019 has contended that she is doing business under the name Matru Ayurveda and the defendant is doing business under the name Matruveda . She further contended that the trademark of the defendant is so deceptively similar to the trade mark of plaintiff that in spite of she having established her business ever since the year 2015 on the strength of her trademark Matru Ayurveda , on account of the defendant starting his business subsequently in the year 2018 with his trademark Matruveda , her established customers got deceived and on account of same, she has suffered huge losses in the business and therefore, she prayed for a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from infringing plaintiff s established registered trademark Matru Ayurveda by using the offending trademark Matruveda in the preparation, sale and distribution of herbal products or by using any other mark in respect of such products that is deceptively similar to the plaintiff s well established and registered trademark Matru Ayurveda .