RAJ SODA WATER Vs. ROYAL ROSE INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - Instant appeal has been filed by the plaintiff appellant firm against the order dated 03.03.2016 passed by learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Sriganganagar in Civil Misc. Case No. 2/2016 'M/s Raj Soda Water Vs. M/s Royal Rose Industries' whereby, the application of the plaintiff appellant under Order 39 R 1 & 2 Code of Civil Procedure along with the suit has been rejected.

(2.) Succinctly stated facts of the case are that plaintiff firm preferred a civil suit bearing No. 02/2016 for permanent injunction for passing off action of trademark, rendition of accounts and damages along with an application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC. It was averred in the plaint that plaintiff appellant has been undertaking the business of manufacturing and trading soda water, cold drink and various types of syrups (sharbat) under the brand name/trademark "RAJ" which was part of its original name Deshraj and thereby acquired substantial goodwill amongst its customers. It was averred in the plaint that after death of Deshraj, his wife Smt. Sheela Devi executed an authority letter dated 11.01.2000 whereby, she exclusively permitted her family members to use the trademark/brand name "RAJ" in relation to any company or firm incorporated by them to undertake the business of soda water, cold drinks and Sharbat. However, in the year 2016, more particularly Jan., 2016, the appellant came to know that defendant respondent has started using the exactly same trademark "RAJ" in relation to manufacturing and selling of similar goods to that of the appellant in the city of Suratgarh and neighbouring cities. It was further averred that since the respondent was the subsequent user of the same trademark "RAJ", it has created confusion and deception in the mind of customers of plaintiff appellant firm.

(3.) It is further stated in the plaint that the defendant respondent has started using exactly the same packing label, color combination, punch line, placement of word, design and presentation, overall get up in combination with the trademark "RAJ" and the action of the respondent defendant is nothing but passing of the trademark "RAJ" and the good will of the appellant firm.