HINDUSTAN PENCILS LTD Vs. PUMA STATIONERY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I propose to decide IA No. 2915 of 2004, which is an application filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for an injunction restraining the Defendants from, in any manner, dealing with erasers or any other allied goods under the trademarks Plasto and No dust, which are similar to the trademarks Plasto and 'Non dust' used by the Plaintiff on its erasers, so as to pass off its goods as those of the Plaintiff. An ex parte a interim injunction was granted on 6th May 2004 and this was argued for confirmation on 6th July 2005 when orders were reserved.

(2.) The Defendants filed IA No. 4129 of 2004 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC for vacation of the ex parte ad interim injunction. Although no separate arguments were advanced in respect of this application, learned counsels agreed that the decision in IA 2915 of 2004 would also dispose of IA No. 4129 of 2004 This order will, therefore, dispose of IA 4129 of 2004 also.

(3.) The Plaintiff is an established manufacturer of stationery items such as pencils, erasers, sharpeners etc. since 1957. It sells its products under the trademarks Nataraj and Apsara of which it is a registered proprietor.