AUDIOPLUS Vs. MANOJ NAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Preface: - These are two interlocutory applications filed on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant. The interlocutory application filed on behalf of the plaintiff is I.A. No. 4762/2020. This application is preferred under the provisions of Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [in short "CPC"] Upon an ex-parte ad interim injunction being granted in favour of the plaintiff on 24.06.2020, the defendant, moved his application i.e. I.A. No. 6664/2020 under the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the CPC for the vacation of the interim order dated 24.06.2020.

(2.) A perusal of the record, which includes the pleadings and the documents, would show that the instant litigation has erupted between the plaintiff and the defendant [hereafter collectively referred to as "parties"] in the backdrop of the following facts and circumstances.

(3.) The instant suit has been filed against the defendant for issuance of a decree of permanent injunction against him and to restrain him from infringing the plaintiff's trademarks and/or passing off his goods as if they originate from the plaintiff. The other reliefs such as a decree for: declaration; delivery of goods bearing the impugned mark; rendition of accounts; and damages have also been claimed against the defendant.