DHARA SEEDS Vs. GUJARAT FARM SEEDS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant ori. defendant has filed this Appeal From Order under Order-43 Rule-1 of Civil Procedure Code challenging the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 7, Vadodara below Application Ex. 5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 10 of 2007 on 27. 3. 2008 whereby the learned trial Judge granted interim injunction in favour of the present respondent ori. plaintiff and the appellant was restrained from manufacturing, marketing, selling, printing and publishing the trade mark "guwar NEELIMA-51" or any other trade mark which is identical, same or similar to the trade mark "guwar NEELIMA-51" of the present respondent ori. plaintiff.

(2.) THIS Court has issued notice for final disposal on 23. 4. 2008. Heard Mr. Tejas M. Barot, learned advocate appearing for appellant and Mr. R. R. Shah, learned advocate appearing for respondent.

(3.) THE main ground of challenge of the order passed by the learned trial Judge is that the suit itself is not maintainable and yet the interim relief was granted. For this purpose, Mr. Barot has submitted that before filing of present suit the respondent ori. plaintiff has already filed earlier suit being Regular Civil Suit No. 7 of 2004 in the Court of learned District Judge, Kheda and the said suit was in respect of same cause of action and relief. The said suit was subsequently renumbered as Suit No. 15 of 2006 on its transfer to the Court of learned District Judge, Anand. The said suit was in respect of same cause of action and relief and it was unconditionally withdrawn by the respondent plaintiff vide Ex. 33. He has, therefore, submitted that in view of withdrawal of earlier suit, fresh suit for the same cause of action and same relief was not maintainable. He has further submitted that against the order passed in the earlier suit, the appellant preferred Appeal from Order No. 12 of 2006 before this Court wherein stay was granted against the implementation of the order passed by the learned trial Judge in earlier suit. He has, therefore, submitted that once this Court stayed the order granting interim injunction, with a view to circumventing the said order of this Court, the respondent ori. plaintiff could not have been permitted to file second suit in respect of the same subject matter.