JAGAN NATH PREM NATH Vs. BHARTIYA DHOOP KARYALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the order under appeal, the learnedingle Judge on the original side has vacated an interim ex parte injunction granted to the appellant in a suit for permia,nent injunction filed by him against the respondent on the allegations of 'infringement' and 'passing off' in respect of his registered trade mark in relation to 'agarbatis' etc.

(2.) The learned single Judge ha.s held that the appellant had failed to establish any exclusive right in regard to the use of the numerals 555 appearing in his registered trade mark in respect of 'agarbatis' and that at this stage it could not be said th(a,t these numerals 555 were the distinctive or essential features of his trade mark. He further observed that as the respondent had not copied the respondents' trade mark as a whole, no case for injunction was made out.

(3.) Before dealing with the merits, it would be appropriate to notice the legal aspect of the questions that require consideration for the decision of the controversy.