IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 28.03.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN C.S.No.89 of 2006 Khaja Mohammed Azeemuddin ... Plaintiff Vs.
M/s.Anees International, New No.37, Elephant Tank 2nd Street, Ice House, Chennai-14. ... Defendant Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. and under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules and Sections 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, praying for a judgment and decree,
[a] to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant by itself, its servants or agents or anyone claiming through it from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's well established trade mark “INTORICA” by using the offending trade mark “INTORICA” or any other mark or marks which are in any way deceptively similar to or a colourable imitation of the plaintiff's well established trade mark “INTORICA” either by manufacturing or selling or offering for sale or in any manner advertising the same.
[b] to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant by itself, its servants or agents or anyone claiming through it from in any manner passing off of its “handloom cotton fabrics” bearing the offending trade mark “INTORICA”, either by manufacturing, selling or offering for sale or in any manner advertising the same;
P.KALAIYARASAN, J.
gya
[c] to direct the defendant to surrender to the plaintiff the entire stock of unused offending handloom cotton fabrics bearing the offending trade mark label “INTORICA” along with the blocks and dyes for destruction;
[d] to direct the defendant to render a true and faithful account of the profits earned by the defendant through the sale of the handloom cotton fabrics bearing the offending trade mark “INTORICA” and directing the payment of such profits to the plaintiff for the passing off committed by the defendant; and
[e] to direct the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the costs of suit.
For Plaintiffs : No appearance J U D G M E N T Though the matter is listed today under the caption “for dismissal”, there is no representation on behalf of the plaintiff. Hence, this suit is dismissed for default. No costs.
28.03.2017 gya C.S.No.89 of 2006 http://www.judis.nic.in