MAHESH JAYALAL DADHIA Vs. THIO PHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE under Rules 147 and 148 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (O. S.) Rules, 1980 is granted to the plaintiffs to take out the Notice of Motion in terms of the draft Notice of Motion handed in. Notice of Motion made returnable forthwith. Defendants have been served and affidavits in reply and rejoinder have been filed. By consent of the parties, the Notice of Motion is being disposed of finally at this stage.

(2.) BY this suit, the plaintiffs are seeking an order restraining the defendants from manufacturing, selling and/or trading their pharmaceutical products bearing the trade marks BROSMIN, ACTIZYME, ENERPRO, PRESTIGESIC and/or PRESTIFEN or any other mark identical and/or deceptively similar thereto as, according to the plaintiffs, the defendants are not entitled to use the same.

(3.) PLAINTIFF No. 1, defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are members of the same family. They are partners in the family partnership firms being plaintiff No. 2 and defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 2 is the brother of the first plaintiff. Defendant No. 3 is the sister-in-law of the first plaintiff and defendant No. 4 is the niece of the first plaintiff. They are members of a family known as Dadhia family. This family owns several firms, companies, properties and plaintiff No. 1 along with his father and his four brothers including defendant No. 2 were carrying on business as a joint family known as "dadhia group". The business of the Dadhia family is spread over various cities in India, including Mumbai.