Veerendr Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) - The appellant/plaintiff has instituted the present appeal assailing the order dated 1st July, 2015, made by the trial Court declining its application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short "CPC"), for grant of temporary injunction.
(2.) Briefly, the essential skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised, are that the appellant/plaintiff is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and is into business of tea manufacturing under the registered trade mark 'Maheshwari'. It is pleaded case of the appellant/plaintiff that the respondent/defendant recently started using deceptively similar artistic work/packing material/label/desi gnunder by the name 'Vijay Shree', with an intention to encash upon the hard earned goodwill of the appellant/plaintiff. The appellant/plaintiff instituted the suit proceedings for rendition of accounts, damages and permanent injunction for infringement and passing off action of the artistic work/packing material/label of the registered trade mark 'Maheshwari' as well as infringement of copyright.
(3.) Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. R.N. Mathur, assisted by Mr. G.D. Bansal, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the memo of the appeal, emphatically argued that the trial Court committed gross error for it recorded a wrong finding on the issue of registration since the appellant/plaintiff has been accorded registration of Trade Mark Type : Device and Word Mark : 'MAHESHWARI AND DEVICE OF CUP AND SAUCER'. The registration has been accorded in response to its Registration Application No.1201204 with reference of Class : 30. It is further contended that conditions and limitations have been incorporated in the backdrop of contemplation under Section 2(za) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (for short 'the Act of 1999').;