The case revolves around a dispute between Mahavir PVC Cables Factory, the registered proprietor of the trademark "MAHAVIR," and Indo Mahaveer Kable. Mahavir PVC Cables Factory alleges that Indo Mahaveer Kable has been infringing on its trademark by using the similar mark "INDO MAHAVEER KABLE" for selling PVC wires and cables. Mahavir PVC Cables Factory claims that this action amounts to passing off and dilutes the goodwill associated with its trademark. The primary issue before the court is whether Mahavir PVC Cables Factory is entitled to an interim injunction against Indo Mahaveer Kable.

Case Citation: MANU/OR/0485/2023
Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
Date of Decision: 06.04.2023

Procedural History:
This appeal is filed against the order of the District Judge, Cuttack, who rejected the appellant's prayer for an interim injunction against the respondent. The appellant had initially filed an original suit seeking relief for trademark infringement and passing off. The trial court held that the appellant established a prima facie case but failed to demonstrate the balance of convenience and irreparable injury necessary for the grant of interim relief.

Issue Presented:
The court addresses the following issue: Whether the appellant is entitled to an interim injunction against the respondent to restrain them from using the disputed trademark "INDO MAHAVEER KABLE" for PVC wires and cables.

Rule of Law:
The court relies on the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and cites the case of Laxmikant V. Patel vs. Chetanbhat Shah and Ors. (2002) 3 SCC 65. The court emphasizes that in an action for passing off, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury to obtain an interim injunction.

Analysis and Reasoning:
The court agrees with the trial court's finding that the appellant has established a strong prima facie case. It cites the case of Laxmikant V. Patel, which states that a business name or trademark acquires goodwill and reputation, which courts should protect. The court notes that the appellant's business predates the respondent's and that the balance of convenience favors the appellant.

It emphasizes that the appellant's reputation and goodwill should be protected from any deceptive use of its trademark. The court also takes into account the potential risk to consumers if substandard materials are used in the respondent's products. It concludes that the appellant has satisfied all the necessary tests for the grant of an interim injunction.

Holding and Decision:
The court holds that the appellant is entitled to an interim injunction against the respondent. It restrains the respondent from using the disputed trademark "INDO MAHAVEER KABLE" for manufacturing, using, and marketing PVC wires and cables until the final disposal of the suit.

Implications and Significance:
This decision reaffirms the importance of protecting intellectual property rights and preventing deceptive use of trademarks. It highlights the need to consider the interest of consumers and the potential risks they may face if substandard products are sold under a similar trademark. The decision sets a precedent for granting interim injunctions in cases of trademark infringement and passing off.

Conclusion:
The High Court of Orissa at Cuttack held that the appellant, Mahavir PVC Cables Factory, is entitled to an interim injunction against Indo Mahaveer Kable. The court found that the appellant established a strong prima facie case, and the balance of convenience and potential irreparable injury favored the appellant. The court recognized the importance of protecting the appellant's trademark and preventing any deceptive use that could harm its reputation and goodwill.

The interim injunction restrains the respondent from using the disputed trademark "INDO MAHAVEER KABLE" for manufacturing, using, and marketing PVC wires and cables until the final disposal of the suit. This decision sets a precedent for granting interim injunctions in cases of trademark infringement and passing off, emphasizing the significance of intellectual property rights and consumer protection.