Capital Plastic Industries vs Kappy Plastic Industries on 21 May, 1988
It appears that the judgment of the Division Bench in the case of Capital Plastic Industries (supra was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and the judgment given in M/s.Kumar Electric Works Vs Anuj Electronics (supra) the argument was noticed in para 10 of the judgment that as the plaintiff and defendant are both praetorspraetorsof trade mark belonging to Japanese company, thus, relief of injunction cannot be given to the plaintiff and the Division Bench's judgment was referred to. The learned Judge held that there is no evidence to show that Japanese company had ever used this trade mark in this country and thus, in view of such peculiar facts the Single Bench held that the plaintiff was entitled to the said relief. So, the ratio laid down by the Division Bench was held not applicable to the facts of the said case.