- (1.) This FAO is against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar in the respondents' application for interlocutory reliefs in an action for infringement and passing off.
(2.) The learned Judge allowed the respondents-plaintiffs' application by restraining the appellants-defendants from manufacturing, marketing or offering for sale of their products i.e. chaff cutter or agricultural implements without collaborating with the respondents-plaintiffs in contravention to the deed of assignment dated 07.05.1996 during the pendency of the suit.
(3.) The operative part of the order read by itself does not specify the ambit or the nature of the order. Words to this effect are used in the body of the judgment as well. What the learned Judge meant is apparent from the following sentences of paragraph-12 of the impugned order:- "The word 'collaboration' (as per dictionary) means and denotes the act of manufacturing jointly and not solely by either party. Therefore, what was legally required from the defendants and incumbent upon them, was to use the brand 'TOTA' and the name of the plaintiff concern, only in collaboration with the plaintiff. Their consistent stand that they are using the said marka since 1996, is indicative of the fact that they have never sought the consent of the plaintiff nor are manufacturing or marketing or selling their products in collaboration of the plaintiff firm and, thus, the defendants are apparently committing breach of a material term and condition of the deed of assignment dated 7.5.1996 Annexure A1. Therefore, the plaintiff has certainly prima facie case in its favour and balance of convenience also tilts in its favour. The plaintiff firm will certainly suffer an irreparable loss in case the respondents continue the breach of a material term of deed of assignment, admittedly entered into between the parties. Therefore, the plaintiff has been able to prove the existence of all the three ingredients, requisite for the grant of ad-interim injunction in its favour.";