SMITHKLINE BEECHAM Vs. PRAKASH SETIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants have filed the written statement. However, no reply is filed to the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure is on record. Accordingly, the suit shall proceed ex parte as against the defendants. At the request of Counsel appearing for the plaintiff, permission is granted to lead evidence by filing an affidavit, which shall be filed within eight weeks. I.A. No. 4802/2001:

(2.) The present suit is filed by the plaintiffs praying for a perpetual injunction against the defendants restraining them, their agents, servants and all other persons acting on their behalf from manufacturing, exporting, selling, offering for export, or advertising in India or overseas, directly or indirectly dealing in pharmaceutical preparations under the trade mark ABEN or ALBEN or any other deceptively similar variant similar to the trade mark of the plaintiff-ALBEN.

(3.) It is contended that the defendants have adopted the trade mark ABEN and are using the same for their goods thereby causing confusion and deception. It is also contended that adoption of the said trade mark ABEN by the defendants is an invasion to the legitimate rights of the plaintiffs.