TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY J. - (1.) This is the plaintiff's appeal against the order dated 8th August, 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the plaintiff's main injunction application being GA 555 of 2012 and the defendants' vacating application being GA 1512 of 2013.
(2.) Records reveal that the appellant preferred CS 27 of 2012 for infringement and passing off special Biryani rice under the mark 'MALABAR' GOLD' or other mark/trade name which is identical with and/or a fraudulent imitation of the plaintiff's trademark 'MALABAR'. In connection with the said suit, the appellant filed an injunction application being GA 555 of 2012. In the same an interim order was passed on 2nd July, 2012 in terms of prayer 'a' of the Notice of Motion which runs as follows :- (a) The Respondents and their men, servants, agents, employees dealers, and distributors and/or assigns be restrained by an order of injunction from using and/or applying and/or utilising and/or advertising the impugned trade mark "MALABAR GOLD" as shown in Annexure "D" hereto or any trademark which is deceptively similar or so nearly resembles the said trademark "MALABAR" of the Plaintiff in any manner whatsoever."
(3.) Aggrieved by the said interim order the defendants/respondents preferred an appeal being APOT 433 of 2012. The said appeal was heard and disposed of on 14th September 2012 without interfering with the interim order. However, it was made it clear that in the event the appellant succeeds in the application for obtaining registration of the trade mark then it would be open to the appellant to apply to the learned Trial Judge for appropriate interlocutory relief on subsequent development. It was further clarified that the observation recorded by the learned Trial Judge will not be binding or influencing factor before the Trade Mark Registry and that the Trade Mark Registry will decide the matter as early as possible. All other points were kept open to be decided by the learned Trial Judge.;