Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 31

Plaintiff has filed the suit against the defendant for permanent injunction
for infringement of copyright and also passing of besides rendition of accounts and
damages with respect to plaintiffs packaging under the trademark NATRAJ in
respect of penciles alleging that the arrangement of features, lay out, colour scheme
of the plaintiffs carton is substantially an imitation of their artistic work.
No rebuttal to the claim of the plaintiffs Suit of the plaintiff for permanent
injunction decreed against the defendants.Plaintiffs also held entitled to damages
to the tune of Rs. 2 lacs.

Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 31

Written statement on behalf of the defendant No. 1 stated that neither he nor anyone else was
carrying on business in the name and style as alleged . Defendant No. 1
raised other serious issues with respect to the existence of the address —
Sole witness of the plaintiff made no effort whatsoever to meet the said
pleas . No evidence on behalf of the Plaintiff in this regard HELD to be not found entitled
to any claim for delivery, rendition of accounts or damages or costs against
the defendants 1 and 3.Further HELD A decree for recovery of damages in
sum of Rs. 1 lac is also passed in favour of the plaintiff and
against the defendant No. 2.

Trade Marks Act, 1999 Section 31

HELD
Both parties are German Companies and are using the mark/word LOWENBRAU
all over the world and are distinguished by other mark/word on their
label/mark—Mark/word LOWENBRAU is a part of public juris in Germany
and in most countries with German beer and is not distinctive of a
particular manufacturer Further HELD Concurrent and honest user was a valid
defence against an action for infringement Therefore, ex parte stay order vacated