AIR 1990 DELHI 19

Delhi High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): B. N. Kirpal , J

Trade and Merchandise Marks Act (43 of 1958) , S.28, S.106— Application for injunction - Laches and acquiescence - Trade mark used by defendants similar to that of registered mark of plaintiffs - Use or adoption of mark by defendants proved to be fraudulent - Plaintiffs not guilty, of inordinate delay or acquiescence - Plaintiffs are entitled to interim relief of injunction. Trade mark - Infringement of -Injunction - Laches and acquiescence. Even though there may be some doubt as to whether laches or acquiescence can derv, the relief of a permanent injunction, it has been consistently held that if the defendant acts fraudulently with the knowledge that he is violating the plaintiffs rights then in that case, even if there is an inordinate delay on the part of the plaintiff in taking action against the defendant, the relief of injunction is not denied. Where there is an honest concurrent user by the defendant then inordinate delay or laches may defeat the claim of damages or rendition of accounts but the relief of injunction should not be refused. This is so because it is the interest of the general public, which is the third party in such cases, which has to be kept in mind. In the case of inordinate delay or laches, as distinguished from the case of an acquiescence, the main prejudice which may be caused to the defendant is that by reason of ....