Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. - (1.) Universal Petro-Chemicals Limited (Universal in short) institutes this suit, inter alia, praying for a decree for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from marketing in India any lubricant and in particular finished automotive and industrial lubricant under the brand name Aral or by using the design of Aral; perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from allowing or permitting anybody other than the plaintiff to market finished automotive and industrial lubricant in India under the trademark Aral or design of Aral; declaration that collaboration agreement dated November 1, 1994 read with supplementary agreements dated January 3, 1995 and December 27, 2002 and the agreement upon trademark and design are operating, subsisting and binding upon the defendants till December 31, 2009; declaration that the letter of termination dated April 14, 2004 is void and cancelled and for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from taking any step or from giving any effect to the said letter of termination; perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from acting contrary to or in breach of the said collaboation agreement and the agreement upon trade mark and design and the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from procuring breach thereof or acting contrary thereto in any manner whatsoever; decree for specific performance of the said collaboration agreement and the agreement upon trade marks; perpetual injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from interfering with the right of the plaintiff to market its products of finished automotive and industrial lubricant under the trade mark Aral and by use of Aral design.
(2.) In the said suit, BP p.1.c. (BP in short), Castrol India Limited (Castrol in short) and Aral Aktiengesellschaft (Aral in short) have been impleaded as defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively.
(3.) In connection with the said suit Universal files an interlocutory application praying for an order of injunction to restrain the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from marketing in India any lubricant including finished automotive and industrial lubricant under the brand name Aral or using the design of Aral; injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from allowing marketing of finished automotive and industrial lubricant in India by anybody other than the plaintiff under the trade mark Aral or design of Aral; injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from taking any step or giving any effect to the said letter of termination dated April 14, 2004 in any manner whatsoever; injunction restraining the defendant No. 3 from acting in any manner contrary to or in breach of the said collaboration agreement and the agreement upon trade mark and design and to restrain the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from procuring breach thereof or acting contrary thereto in any manner whatsoever; injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs right to market its product of finished automotive and industrial lubricant under the trade mark Aral and by using of Aral design.;