A GURUPRASAD Vs. T NEELAKANDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant in his affidavit contends as follows : The applicant has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using the name "First/1st" for conducting any business relating to the computer and pass-off their business. In O.A. No. 151/1995 interim injunction was prayed for. On 20th February, 1995, this Court has granted interim injunction, restraining the respondent till 28-2-1995 from using the trade name "First Computers/Ist Computers" or the expression "First/Ist" in Relation to its Computer business. On 28-2-1995, after enquiry, this Court has reserved orders. On 14-3-1995, this Court has passed orders, making the interim injunction absolute and dismissing the application for vacating the injunction. On 22-3-1995, the defendant moved O.S. Appeal No. 74/1995 before the Division Bench of this Court and prayed for stay of the operation of the Order of Interim injunction. The Stay was not granted. In spite of injunction granted from 20-2-1995, the respondent has been causing publication of his earlier advertisement with the only change of removing the expression "Ist Computer" and continues to retain "Ist C" in respect of Computer business. The Conduct of the respondent amounts to willful and deliberate disobedience of the Order of Court punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act. Hence the application.

(2.) The respondent filed a counter contending as follows :- The respondent has filed O.S. Appeal No. 74/1995 against the order of Interim Injunction dated 14th March, 1995, and on 10-4-1995, the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to vacate the interim injunction granted in A. No. 151/1995. The applicant filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court and it was dismissed. When stay was moved in CMP No. 4716/1995 in OSA No. 74/1995, the Division Bench has passed orders as follows :"

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the applicant would contend that an interim injunction order has been granted in favour of the applicant restraining the respondent from using the trade name "First Computers/Ist Computers" and for using the name First/Ist for conducting any business relating to the Computers and pass off their business and this Interim Order has been made absolute by this Court on 14-3-1995, and the respondent who was aware of the same, has caused publications of their advertisement in "The Hindu" as well as in "The Indian Express" on 9th March, 1995 during the pendency of the Interim Injunction and thereby intentionally committed contempt of Court by violating the order and therefore, they should be punished. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would contend that this Application under the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent alleging that the respondents has violated the order of this Court and thereby committed contempt is misconceived and yet the respondent is tendering an unconditional apology and the same may be accepted.