Mukta Gupta, J. - (1.)By the present suit the plaintiff seeks a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant, its director, officers, retailers, stockists, distributors, agents, representatives and employees from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, providing services directly or indirectly dealing in goods and services under the registered mark "NO TURN" or in any manner using the plaintiff's registered mark "NO TURN" or any other trademark which is deceptively similar thereto, amounting to infringement, passing off the defendant's business as that of the plaintiff or resulting in dilution and tarnishment of the plaintiff's registered trademark "NO TURN", delivery up of all the infringing material, rendition of accounts, damages and costs. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff filed IA 4871/2019 seeking ad interim ex-parte injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC wherein vide order dated 3rd April, 2019, this Court granted ad interim injunction in terms of the prayer against the defendant in respect of the trademark "NO TURN" or any other mark deceptively similar thereto. On receipt of summons, the defendant has filed the application being IA 6715/2019 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.
(2.)Case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff filed a trademark application for registration of the mark "NO TURN" on proposed to be used as its trademark on 2nd January, 2008 whereafter plaintiff started using the mark "NO TURN" in association with its mattresses from 15th January, 2008. Plaintiff was granted registration on 4th February, 2011 with effect from 2nd January, 2008. Thus, the plaintiff has registered trademark "NO TURN" under Class-20 for mattresses, wall beds, adjustable beds, coir mats, spring mattresses, sofas, pillows, cushions, seats and other related products. Since 15th January 2008, the plaintiff has been continuously, consistently and uninterruptedly using its trademark "NO TURN" in relation to its products besides other brands. In August, 2018, the plaintiff came to know that the defendant has dishonestly adopted the trademark "NO TURN". Hence, the plaintiff issued a cease and desist notice through its attorney on 7th August, 2018 to the defendant. However, the defendant did not respond to the said notice and continued using the trademark despite a second notice dated 21st August, 2018. On 31st October, 2018, the defendant responded to the legal notice and claimed that it was the prior user of the trademark "NO TURN". After the legal notice of the plaintiff, defendant filed an application on 24th December, 2018 for registration of the trademark "NO TURN" claiming user thereof from 8th October, 2007 which application has been objected to before the Registrar of Trademarks by the plaintiff. Defendant also filed an application for rectification/removal of the plaintiff's registered mark "NO TURN".
(3.)Plaintiff claims that besides being the registered owner of the trademark "NO TURN", the plaintiff has adopted and is in continuous use of the same since 15th January, 2008 which is evident from the trademark registration certificate, the orders and invoices of "NO TURN" labels for a continuous period of around 11 years, the marketing and promotional material including brochures, steadily increasing yearly sales figure of the "NO TURN" mattresses and the expenses on advertisements and promotion thereof.