TARUN JAIN Vs. MANOJ JAIN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IA No.12111 of 2016 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC)

(2.) Summons of the suit and notice of the application for interim relief were issued, though no ex-parte relief sought granted.

(3.) On 20th Oct., 2016, the senior counsel for the defendants contended that the business of 'NIKKY POINT' was in fact of the defendant No.1 and it is the defendant No.1 who has built and developed the same and the plaintiff at the time of commencement of the business was a minor and was like a trainee under the defendant No.1. Finding prima facie from the documents filed by the plaintiff that the business was in the name of the plaintiff, even though the defendant No.1 may have been the face of the business and further finding that the registration of the year 2007 of the trade mark 'NIKKY POINT' was also in the name of the plaintiff, it was on 20th Oct., 2016 observed that a case for grant of ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the word 'NIKKY' or any other word/mark deceptively similar to the word/mark 'NIKKY' was made out. At that stage, the senior counsel for the defendants offered to deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in this Court to compensate the plaintiff for loss if any, to enable the defendants to continue using the marks 'NIKKY FASHION' and 'NIKKY GIRLS WEAR' on the occasion of the festival of 'Diwali' of the year 2016. Accepting the said undertaking of the defendants and in view thereof and subject to the amount being deposited, at that stage, interim injunction was not granted.