JUDGMENT
Sharda Agarwal, J.
1. The matter is taken up as yesterday was declared a holiday.
2. On 11th May, 2000 the learned counsel for the defendants 1 & 2 was granted last opportunity of three months to obtain the instructions from his client on changing the use of the mark ‘Ta-Ta’ from any other name. The learned counsel for defendants 1 & 2 has not sought instructions till date and a period of more than 7 months have lapsed. An order dated 11th May, 2000 also states that in case no response is received on the next date of hearing from the defendants 1 & 2 the interim orders as prayed in terms of injunction application are liable to be passed against them. Since the learned counsel for the defendants has not sought any instructions till date and learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the defendants are still using the impugned trade mark ‘Ta-Ta’ for lottery tickets to misappropriate the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff’s trade mark and the use of the trade mark ‘Ta-Ta’ is deceptively and phonetically similar to that of the trade mark of the plaintiff.
3. Learned counsel for defendant No. 3 states that they have filed an affidavit dated 14th October, 2000 that they have stopped running/drawing of lottery in the trade name of ‘Ta-Ta’ morning daily w.e.f. 1.12.97. The defendants are accordingly restrained from selling. Offering for sale or distribution of lottery tickets or any other printed matter under the mark/name ‘Tata Morning and Tata Daily’ or any other mark or name of device the word ‘Tata’ forms a part or from using any other mark which is deceptively and phonetically similar to the mark of the plaintiff. Till the disposal of the suit. The application is accordingly disposed of.
4. Pleadings are complete however parties are requested to file the documents. The same be filed within four weeks.
5. To be listed before Joint Registrar for admission/denail of the documents on 22nd March, 2001.