Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.28 seconds)Ultra Home Construction Pvt Ltd vs Purushottam Kumar Chaubey on 8 April, 2016
14. On being queried on jurisdiction, ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff submits
that since it has its registered office in Delhi, under Section 134 of the
Trademarks Act, this Court has jurisdiction. Ld. counsel for the Plaintiff
submits that the Plaintiff does not have any branch in Puducherry. He, thus,
relies upon the decision of ld. Division Bench in Ultra Homes Construction
Pvt. Ltd. V. Purushottam Kumar Chaubey, 227 (2016) DLT 320 (DB .
Chandrakant Sahu vs Coal India Limited 47 Wa/48/2018 Indra ... on 10 December, 2019
20. Thus, in terms of the judgement extracted above as also the decision
in Laxmikant Patel (supra) it is clear that in cases relating to trade mark
violations and passing off, if the evidence establishes a prima facie case, even
at the ex-parte stage, injunction ought to be granted.
N.R. Dongre And Ors vs Whirlpool Corporation And Anr on 30 August, 1996
17. We are conscious of the law that this Court would
not ordinarily interfere with the exercise of discretion in
the matter of grant of temporary injunction by the High
Court and the Trial Court and substitute its own
discretion therefore except where the discretion has
been shown to have been exercised arbitrarily or
capriciously or perversely or where the order of the
Court under scrutiny ignores the settled principles of
law regulating grant or refusal of interlocutory
injunction. An appeal against exercise of discretion is
said to be an appeal on principle. Appellate court will
not reassess the material and seek to reach a conclusion
different from the one reached by the court below solely
on the ground that if it had considered the matter at the
trial stage it would have come to a contrary conclusion.
If the discretion has been exercised by the trial court
reasonably and in a judicial manner the fact that the
appellate court would have taken a different view may
not justify interference with the trial court's exercise of
discretion [(see Wander Ltd. v. Ant ox India P. Ltd.
MANU/SC/0595/1990 and N.R. Dongre v. Whirlpool
Corporation and Anr.: MANU/SC/1223/1996 :
The Indian Partnership Act, 1932
Section 134 in The Trade Marks Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
1