BRIJ MOHAN SHARMA Vs. MILTON PLASTICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15. 5. 1999, passed by the trial court in a suit for permanent injunction and rendition of accounts filed by the appellant against the respondent, in respect of the trademark, "milton", relating to electrical goods including electrical appliances.

(2.) THE opening para of the impugned judgment shows that the trial court proposed to decide two applications for interim orders, one filed by the appellant in a suit instituted by it and the other filed by the respondent, who had filed a written statement-cum-counter claim against the appellant. While dismissing the interim application of the appellant and granting relief to the respondent on its interim application, the trial court proceeded to dismiss the suit of the appellant with the observation that the cause of action did not lie with the appellant but with the respondent and that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the suit of the appellant pending.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant submits that the trial court could not have summarily dismissed the suit of the appellant in such a cursory fashion without putting the same to trial, particularly when the cause of action for instituting the suit was clearly disclosed in para 13 of the plaint.