GOYAL ELECTRICAL Vs. BAID ROTOMOULDERS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Defendant petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 1-11 -2010 (Annexure-6) passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 7, Jaipur city, Jaipur whereby trial Court allowed application of the plaintiff respondent for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule (1) and (2) C. P. C. and also directed that the plaint be returned under Order 7 Rule 10 to the plaintiff to re-submit fresh plaint only in respect of its case of infringement of registered trademark "POLYCON" and not for "Passing off action".

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that trial Court committed an illegality in passing the order of injunction against the defendant and simultaneously in passing the order for return of plaint to the plaintiff to re-submit the fresh plaint only in respect of its case of infringement of registered trademark "POLYCON". He submitted that when suit was going to be returned, then injunction order should not have been passed against the petitioner. He, therefore, submitted that order passed by the trial Court is without jurisdiction and the same is liable to be set aside by this Court.