AMAR SUITINGS LTD Vs. AMAR SYNTEX PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge whereby application filed by the plaintiff (appellant herein) under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. for grant of interim injunction restraining the defendant to use mark "AMTEX SUITINGS" or to sell their goods under the name and style of any other name similar to the plaintiff's trade mark "AMARTEX SUITINGS" with logo of galloping horse, has been dismissed.

(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff that it is manufacturing quality suitings and is proprietor of trade mark AMARTEX SUITINGS with logo of galloping horse. The same is registered in cloth at No. 520868 under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is alleged that the plaintiff had been using the trade mark AMARTEX SUITINGS with logo of galloping horse since 1989/90. It is claimed that the defendant seeing the sales of the plaintiff company, started business in the trade name of AMTEX TEXTILE SUITINGS and started marketing cloth/suitings in the trade name of AMTEX SUITINGS. Plaintiff alleged that on the packing used by the defendant, AMTEX SUITINGS with logo of galloping horse is printed and the colour and shade of the same is similar to AMARTEX SUITINGS i.e. the registered trade mark of plaintiff.

(3.) Upon notice, defendant in its written statement, denied the allegations made by the plaintiff in its suit. Defendant has denied that the plaintiff is the exclusive owner of label and design or the goods of the plaintiff have come to be associated with the trade mark AMARTEX SUITINGS with logo of galloping horse. According to the defendant, from its inception, it started the business in the name and style of AMTEX SUITINGS. It is alleged that the trade mark AMTEX SUITINGS is phonetically different and colour, shade and design are also different. It is also alleged that the defendant has no intention of copying the trade mark of the plaintiff or to pass off its goods as that of the plaintiff company. Along with the suit, plaintiff filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. for grant of temporary injunction.