Partly allowed

King Point Enterprise Co. Ltd. v. M/S. Maarg (India)

Madras HC5 Dec 2019A/9115/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order sets aside an ex parte decree passed in an intellectual property suit involving deceptive trade marks due to lack of proper service. The court restores the suit for hearing, directs the defendant to file a written statement, and allows the interim injunction to continue until 15.02.2020.

What did the court decide?

The ex parte decree passed on 11.10.2018 is set aside; the suit is restored; the defendant is directed to file a written statement; the interim order continues till 15.02.2020.

King Point Enterprise Co. Ltd. Vs M/S. Maarg (India) — Intellectual Property | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

A.No.9115 of 2019 in C.S.No.163 of 2018

¶2

A.No.9115 of 2019 in C.S.No.163 of 2018

¶3

Dr.G.Jayachandran, J.

¶4

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant/defendant.

¶5

This application is taken out to set aside the ex parte decree passed

¶6

by this Court on 11.10.2018 in the matter arising from the suit filed for

¶7

injunction restraining the defendant from using deceptively similar character

¶8

of the plaintiff's trade mark.

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that, the

¶10

applicant is the resident of Taiwan. The suit summon was not served on them. Based on the private notice served on the defendant in the interlocutory application has deemed it as completed service and set the defendant ex

¶11

parte on 18.09.2018. Thereafter on 11.10.2018, ex parte decree was passed. Only after showing the paper advertisement placed by the plaintiff, the

¶12

defendant has come to know about the suit filed by the plaintiff and ex parte decree was passed in it.

¶13

Verification of the Court records substantiates the submission made

¶14

1/3

¶15

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶16

A.No.9115 of 2019 in C.S.No.163 of 2018

¶17

by the applicant, therefore, this Court in order to provide an opportunity to the applicant/defendant the ex parte decree passed on 11.10.2018, is set aside.

¶18

The learned appearing for the respondent/plaintiff submits that till

¶19

the disposal of the suit by setting aside the decree, the interim relief enjoyed

¶20

by the plaintiff should not be disturbed.

¶21

Considering the submission and the balance of convenience involved

¶22

in this case, the request of the learned counsel for the plaintiff is accepted.

¶23

While setting aside the decree passed by this Court on 11.10.2019, consequently, the suit is restored on file. The interim order granted by this Court shall continue till 15.02.2020. Meanwhile the defendant shall file the

Written Statement.

05.12.2019

rpl

2/3

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶29

A.No.9115 of 2019 in C.S.No.163 of 2018

¶30

Dr.G.Jayachandran, J.

¶31

rpl

¶32

A.No.9115 of 2019
in C.S.No.163 of 2018

¶33

05.12.2019

¶34

3/3

¶35

http://www.judis.nic.in

King Point Enterprise Co. Ltd. v. M/S. Maarg (India)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

King Point Enterprise Co. Ltd. v. M/S. Maarg (India)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.a.D. Padmasingh Isaac., Vs J. Sekar.

M/s Venkateswara Financiers Vs M/s Gemini Film Circuit

A.Purushotaman Vs State Rep. by

Jaisingh Jain Vs T.K.S.Pugazhendi

Dvara Trust and another Vs Earthy Goods and Services Pltd

M.R.Rajkumar Vs M/s.Allied Estates and 6 others