Judgment :- P. K. SETHURAMAN, J. This is an application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of O.S. Rules and Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. praying for an interim injunction restraining the respondent, their servants, agents, heirs successors and assigns, printers and distributors, wholesalers and stockists or any of them from using the impugned packets/pouches being Document Nos. 44 of 51 or any other packets or pouches or artistic work which are similar or which are a colourable imitation of the artistic work in the plaintiff's registered copyright as found in Document Nos. 28 to 38, pending disposal of the suit. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the application by the Legal Manager of the applicant/plaintiff company, it has been stated that the suit has been filed by the plaintiff complaining of the acts of infringements committed by the respondent which impugned labels are identical to and/or deceptively similar and a colourable imitation of the artistic work subsisting in the plaintiff's registered copyright. The plaintiff is also complaining against the acts of passing-off committed by the defendant by using labels which are deceptively and/or confusingly similar to the labels used by the plaintiff in respect of their "BROOKE BOND SONA SPIECES". The defendant has dishonestly copied the plaintiff's labels and has adopted the colour scheme, lay-out, get-up in order to trade upon the reputation and goodwill acquired by the plaintiff in respect of the labels used by the plaintiff for sale of the plaintiff's Brooke Bond Sona Spices. 3. A scrutiny of the defendant's impugned labels will show that the defendant has deliberately and intentionally copied the essential features of the artistic work in the registered copyrights of the plaintiff's labels and also has adopted an identical colour scheme and background, lay-out, get up and pictorial representation with absolute mala fide and wrongful motives corresponding to the labels of the respective products of the plaintiff. The defendant's impugned labels are further calculated to pass-off their inferior goods of spices as and for that of the reputed products of the plaintiff. 4. The defendant's impugned labels are further calculated to pass-off their inferior goods of spices as and for that of the reputed products of the plaintiff. 4. The illegal acts of the defendant is grossly prejudicial to the interest of the consumers and the general public and apart from giving rise to civil liability due to the said wrongful activities committed by the defendant, the defendant has also committed a crime under the Copyright Act which is an offence under section 63 of the said Act. 5. The respondent is introducing the packet in the market with the altered pouches very recently. The conduct of the respondent amounts to fraud as the defendant is concisously copying the plaintiff's packets. As the respondent is recent entrant in the field, the balance of convenience is in favour of the plaintiff. The applicant has no objection for the respondent using the name Sona but the get up and the colour scheme. Hence, the application for injunction. 6. The respondent in the counter filed through the Managing Director of the company has contended that the allegations main the affidavit filed in support of the application are misleading in material particulars and no case has been made out for granting the relief prayed for. The suit is laid by the applicant company complaining of the infringement of their registered copyrights in the labels, which have since been discontinued and not in actual us even as per the averments in the plaint and for passing off against the registered proprietor of the Trade Mark suppressing the fact that the defendant company are the registered proprietors of the Trade Mark SONA SPICES. The suit for infringement and passing off is not maintainable and the suit has been filed by the plaintiff only as a counter blast to their suit for injunction in respect of trade mark filed against it in the District Court, Chandigarh with a view to harass. 7. Sona Spices Suppliers was started by the brother of the deponent as Sole Proprietor in October, 1975 adopting the trade name SONA SPICES and using the logo designed by one P.K. Jain in its packets. Provisional permission for Agmark was obtained by him early in 1976 and certificate of Authorisation was issued on 24.6.1976. In March 1979 the defendant company was promoted and the proprietor became the Managing Director. Provisional permission for Agmark was obtained by him early in 1976 and certificate of Authorisation was issued on 24.6.1976. In March 1979 the defendant company was promoted and the proprietor became the Managing Director. Agmark registration has been renewed in the name of the company. On 7.10.1980 application was made for registration of 'Sona Spices' logo used by the company in Trade Mark application No. 367241 in Class 30 claiming user since 16.10.1975 for sales in States of North India. The mark was advertised before acceptance in the Trade Mark Journal on 16.2.83. Opposition No. Delhi 4001 filed by the applicant company was disallowed after enquiring by the Assistant Registrar, New Delhi on merits by order dated 26.2.1990 and the application for registration was allowed to proceed. The appeal filed against the said order is pending in the High Court of Delhi, but the stay prayed for by the applicant was refused. Certificate of Registration of the Trade Mark has been issued to the respondent by the Registrar on 15.6.90. Thus they are the registered proprietors of 'Sona Spices' Trade mark. 8. The applicant which is a multi-national company trading in Tea, started business in spices only in 1980 and they would appear to have applied for trade mark registration for 5 of their labels containing the words 'BROOKE BOND SONA' in December, 1981 and another label in July, 1982 and these trade mark applications are admittedly pending. In view of the oppositions raised, the applicant company would appear to have surruptiously obtained copyright registration for 9 labels on 14.2.83. Copyright registration does not create any right in law since it is mere recordal of a claim made before the Registrar of Copyrights and so a copyright registration may exist even for a counterfiet product of a copied label. The artistic work in the labels which is claimed be registered is no longer in use and admittedly these labels have been altered. The alteration is substantial as a bare perusal would show and the claim that there is only slight modification is not correct. By reason of the substantial alteration the applicant company can claim no right and cannot complaint of infringement of any copyright. 9. The alteration is substantial as a bare perusal would show and the claim that there is only slight modification is not correct. By reason of the substantial alteration the applicant company can claim no right and cannot complaint of infringement of any copyright. 9. It is strange that a new comer to the filed should make bold attempt to complain of infringement and colourable imitation and passing off against the registered proprietor who has been in the field years before. It is the applicant who is guilty of deliberately and intentionally copying the essential features of the trade mark, name and label with wrongful and mala fide motive and it is the applicant which pass off their goods by reason of the reputation which they have obtained in the market and with the public. The applicant company which has pirated the registered trade mark and trade name and which has given up the labels in respect of which copyright registration has been obtained cannot lawfully maintain the application. It is not correct to say that the respondent is introducing the packet in the market with the altered pouches very recently and the conduct of the respondent amounts to a fraud. 10. The respondent are trading in spices in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh and the Union Territories of Delhi and Chandigarh and they have no sales in Tamil Nadu. The trade mark registration is only confined to the States in which they are having sales. It is only with a view to put hardship and loss that the plaintiff has choosen to file the suit alongwith the application. The suit for infringement filed by the defendant against the plaintiff is pending in the District Court, Chandigarh. Hence it has prayed that the application has to be dismissed with costs. 11. The point that arises for consideration in this application is as to whether there should be an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant, their servants, agents heirs, successors and assigns, printers distributors, wholesalers and stockits from using the impugned packets/pouchers which are colourable imitation of the artistic work in the plaintiff's registered copyright as found in Document Nos. 28 to 38 pending disposal of the suit ? 12. 28 to 38 pending disposal of the suit ? 12. Points : The applicant-plaintiff Brooke Bond (India) Limited has filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from using the impugned packets/pouches being Document Nos. 44 to 51 or any other deceptively and/or confusingly similar labels or artistic work which are similar and/or which are colourable imitations of the artistic work in the plaintiff's registered copyright as found in Document Nos. 28 to 38, for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from in any manner using the impugned labels, specimens of which are filed as document Nos. 44 to 51 or any other deceptively similar labels so as to pass-off or enables others to pass-off the defendant's goods as and for the goods of the plaintiff by using the plaintiff's wrappers namely Document Nos. 28 to 38 or any other wrappers similar to the plaintiff's wrappers and for rendition of accounts on all the profits earned by the defendant by using the impugned labels and for delivery of the dies articles cartons/wrapper bearing the impugned marks. 13. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is carrying on business of the manufacture, sale, marketing, distribution and export of spices and is renowned company in India for more than 75 years and the plaintiff's products of spices is sold and distributed throughout India on an extensive basis. The plaintiff is selling its product of spices in pouches which has a label design with a unique and distinctive colour scheme and background with an artistic representation consisting of a cluster of leaves and a small circle within which a picture of spices is enclosed and a larger green circle like representation enclosing a white area containing the words "Brooke Bond Sona Pure Spices" in green and red and the generic name of that product of spices in English and Hindi in red colour. There is a representation of the Brooke Bond logo mark in red and green at the top of the circle like area. That logo mark being a registered trade mark bearing No. 270068. On the reverse panel there is a similar circle-like representation consisting of three leaves in green which is meant for statutory declaration on a white area. That is in addition to a rectangular area demarcated in red containing descriptions. 14. That logo mark being a registered trade mark bearing No. 270068. On the reverse panel there is a similar circle-like representation consisting of three leaves in green which is meant for statutory declaration on a white area. That is in addition to a rectangular area demarcated in red containing descriptions. 14. Thiru Bhattacharjee, the author of the artistic work subsisting in the Broke Bond Sona Spices labels has visualised and made the said artistic work in the course of his employment with the plaintiff company in the capacity of Marketing Manager under a contract of service and thus the plaintiff is the owner of the nine copyrights mentioned in the plaint. The plaintiff applied for and obtained none copyrights registrations for the label marks used in respect of their products 'Brooke Bond Sona Spices'. 15. The plaintiff has been using the labels for their products of Brooke Bond Sona Spices consisting of pictorial representations of the artistic work in the copyright registrations with similar colour background, colour combination, lay-out-get-up etc. since 1980. In or about April, 1989 the plaintiff made a slight modification to the labels of Brooke Bond Sona Spices' by deleting the small circular representation containing a picture of the spice product with the cluster of leaves and incorporated a cluster of three leaves. The word 'Sona' being written in a repeated fashion, diagonally across the front and reverse panels for the unblended spices and with an additional food photograph corresponding to the product for the blends. The said slight modification is not a substantial alteration of the artistic work in the nine registered copyright labels. 16. In or about the year 1981 the plaintiff applied for the registration of six composite label trade marks containing the words 'Brooke Bond Sona', The word 'Sona' is descriptive and hence no exclusive right to the use of the word Sona can be claimed by anyone. The plaintiff are the registered proprietors of the copyrights and are the proprietors of the Trade marks for which applications are pending. 17. The plaintiff are the registered proprietors of the copyrights and are the proprietors of the Trade marks for which applications are pending. 17. On account of the intrinsic quality superiority and purity of the product of the plaintiff the care and skill exercised by them in marketing the same and the crores of rupees of money and labour expended by them in promoting the sales, the plaintiff has achieved large and extensive sale and has built up every large and valuable reputation for their product 'Brooke Bond Sona Spices'. The plaintiff has spent huge amount for advertisement and publicity expenditure for popularising their copyright and Trade mark under which 'Brooke Bond Sona Spices' has been sold. The labels have come to the associated by the traders and members of the public exclusively with the plaintiff, the essential features being an unique and distinctive colour background and combination, with an artistic pictorial representation consisting of three green leaves forming part of a circle-like representation in green, enclosing the words 'Brooke Bond Sona Pure Spices' in green and red and the name of that product of spice in English and Hindi printed in red and green. On the reverse panel there being a circle like representation consisting of three leaves in green enclosing the statutory declaration panel is white. The word 'Sona' being written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion across the front and reverse panels ; for the unblended spices and with a gold background with a food photograph for the blended spices. The plaintiff has acquired exclusive rights to use the said labels and the traders and the members of the public associate the said colour scheme lay-out get-up and pictorial representation and artistic work, common to all the said labels. 18. While so, the plaintiff came across the defendant's products in respect of which the defendant had adopted a lable which was deceptively and/or confusingly similar to the plaintiff's labels and which are colourable imitation of the artistic work of the plaintiff's copyright registration, apart from being an blatant attempt on the part of the defendant to pass-off their inferior products of spices as and for that of the renowned products of the plaintiff with an infringing device similar to the green circle-like representation of the plaintiff label mark, with the words 'Sona pure spices' which alongwith the said infringing device is printed in green colour. The word 'Sona' is also written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion in which across the front panel of the impugned packet in the manner identical to that of the plaintiff. By using the impugned labels the defendant are infringing the plaintiff's registered copyright and are trying to pass-off the defendant's goods as and for the goods of the plaintiff. 19. The enquiry revealed that the defendant originally sold their goods in packets bearing the mark Sona Spices Logo consisting of two concentric circles with the word Sona Spices Private Limited, Chandigarh, India printed between them and the words Sona Spices contained between them and the words Sona Spices contained between the two halves of the said concentric circles, which mark is also the subject-matter of the Defendant's Trade Mark Application filed as Document No. 40. Subsequently the defendant had switched over to plastic pouches with a colour background corresponding to the respective product of the plaintiff with an infringing device similar to the green-circle like representation of the plaintiff's label marks with the words 'Sona Pure Spices'. The name of the products are also written in a colour identical to the corresponding lable mark/work of the plaintiff. 20. In May, 1990 the defendant introduced similar/near identical plastic pouches and paper packets like that of the plaintiff wherein the word 'Sona' has been written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion in white across the front panel of the impugned packet in the manner identical to that of the plaintiff. Further in the plaint the notice issued by the defendant in January, 1986, has been mentioned and also mention has been made about the reply and also about the Trade Mark applications. 21. The defendant has filed written statement denying the averments in the plaint and it has been stated that the plaintiff company started business in Spices in 1980 and they had applied for registration for 5 labels containing the words 'Brooke Bond Sona' in December, 1981 and another lable in July, 1982 and the applications are still pending. Later in about April, 1989 they had altered the labels and the alternations is substantial and not slight modification as contended by the plaintiff. Later in about April, 1989 they had altered the labels and the alternations is substantial and not slight modification as contended by the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a new corner to the field and the plaintiff company is guilty to copying the essential features of the defendant's Trade Mark, name and label with wrongful and mala fide motive and it is the plaintiff who pass off their goods as those of defendant. The defendant is the registered proprietors of the Trade mark 'Sona' in respect of spices for sale in the States of Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and the Union Territories of Delhi and Chandigarh. 22. The plaintiff being a multi-national company is attempting to use its sheer size to outset the true proprietor of the trade mark Sona. The defendant having adopted the mark Sona in respect of spices ever since 1975 is clearly the prior user and the plaintiff admittedly used the word only in 1980. The suit filed by the defendant is pending in the District Court Chandigarh and the defendant has also obtained Trade Mark registration. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit belatedly. This Court cannot have jurisdiction to try the suit, since the defendant is selling its goods in the States of Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh. Brooke Bond Logo mark is for tea and not for spices. It may be that Shri H. Bhattacharjee designed the lables. But it is clear that the plaintiff copied the essential features of the defendant's mark by not only taking the trade mark Sona itself but also by copyright the bean shaped device and the floral ornamentation at its concave base. There could be no copyright where the work is an imitation. Even the modification made by the plaintiff is with a view to come closer to the Sona spices Trade Mark of the defendant, by copying the diagonal presentation of the word 'Sona' repeatedly written on the front and back of the pouches. Copyright registration confers no right as the registration system is merely a recordal of claims. It has been decided by the Registrar of Trade Marks in the decision dated 26.2.1990 that the defendants are the proprietors and prior users of the trade mark Sona. Copyright registration confers no right as the registration system is merely a recordal of claims. It has been decided by the Registrar of Trade Marks in the decision dated 26.2.1990 that the defendants are the proprietors and prior users of the trade mark Sona. The Sona spices logo was always used from the very beginning as a sort of house mark on each and every product of the defendant. The defendant used the plaintiff before the District Court at Chandigarh and some of the present cartons/pouches were even filed in those proceedings. Hence it is an utter abuse of the process of the Court for the plaintiff to have obtained an ex parte injunction a few days after the defendant had obtained Trade Mark Registration by filing a false case. The plaintiff is not entitled to the injunction and the suit is liable to be dismissed. Thus, it is to be seen the whole case put forward by the plaintiff/applicant has been contraverted in the counter as well as in the written statement filed by the defendant. 24. It is to be seen that the applicant/plaintiff has come forward with the version in the plaint stating that originally the defendant sold their goods in packets bearing the mark Sona Spices Logo consisting of two concentric circles with the word Sona Spices Private Limited, Chandigarh, India printed between them and the words Sona Spices contained between the two halves of the said concentric circles which mark is also the subject-matter of the defendant's Trade Mark Application filed as Document No. 40. Document No. 40 reveals that it was advertised before registration and the packets in which spices were sold have been filed as Document Nos. 41, 42, 43(a) and 43(b). It is the case of the plaintiff that subsequently the defendant switched over plastic pouches with a colour background corresponding to the respective product of the plaintiff within an infringing device similar to the green circle like representation of the plaintiff's label marks with the words 'Sona Pure Spices' which alongwith the said infringing device is printed in green colour. The name of the products are also written in a colour identical to the corresponding label mark of the plaintiff. The representation of their alleged logo-mark in a similar shade of green is printed insignificantly at the foot of the impugned packet reading "Sona Spices Private Limited Chandigarh, India'. The name of the products are also written in a colour identical to the corresponding label mark of the plaintiff. The representation of their alleged logo-mark in a similar shade of green is printed insignificantly at the foot of the impugned packet reading "Sona Spices Private Limited Chandigarh, India'. The above said packets have been filed as Document Nos. 44 to 46. It could be pointed out at this stage packets, Document Nos. 41, 42 and 43(a) and 43(b) are not at all similar to the packets of the applicant/plaintiff. On the other hand, as contended by the appellant/plaintiff the packets filed as Document Nos. 44 to 46 are similar to that of the applicant/plaintiff. 25. In paragraph 21 of the plaint it has been submitted that the defendant introduced similar identical plastic pouches and paper packets like that of the plaintiff wherein in addition to the infringing features the word 'SONA' has been written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion, in white across the front panel of the impugned packet in the manner identical to that of the plaintiff. As submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff for the first time it could be seen that the word 'SONA' has been written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion and as regards the same, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the plaintiff that after seeing the plaintiff's packets in which the word 'SONA' had been written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion, it had been copied by the respondent/defendant in such manner. These packets have been filed as Document Nos. 47 to 50. These packets Document Nos. 47 to 50 are very similar to the packets of the plaintiff. In Document No. 50 Sona has been repeatedly found not diagonally but horizontally. Thus according to the applicant/plaintiff the defendant by using the impugned labels are infringing the plaintiff's registered copyright. 26. As regards those contentions it may be points out in the written statement (paragraph 21) the averments in paragraph 19 of the plaint have been dealt with and those averments have been denied as false. Thus according to the applicant/plaintiff the defendant by using the impugned labels are infringing the plaintiff's registered copyright. 26. As regards those contentions it may be points out in the written statement (paragraph 21) the averments in paragraph 19 of the plaint have been dealt with and those averments have been denied as false. It has been pointed out therein that the plaintiff had come to know of the defendant's labels and cartons as early as in 1980 itself when it came into the market or at any rate in 1986 when the defendant instituted the suit against the plaintiff in which some of the cartons/labels have been filed and therefore the present suit is a fraud on this Court. With regard to the said contention it may be pointed out may be the plaintiff wrong in stating only in 1980 it had come to know of the packets, but it cannot be said that all the packets that are now produced were available even in the year 1980 or 1986. No doubt, evidence has to be led in by the parties as to when the respective packets were introduced in the market by the parties concerned. But so far as the averments are concerned, the averments put forward by the plaintiff have not been properly contraverted in the written statement and the contention of the learned counsel for the plaintiff that the impugned packets with infringement of the copyright of the plaintiff had come into existence only after the plaintiff had introduced those packets appears to be acceptable. Even with regard to the averments in paragraph 20 of the plaint it has been denied as without substances and Sona Spices Logo was also used as a house mark on each and every product of the defendant. 27. It may also be pointed out that there is no specific denial of the averments about the defendant's switch over to plastics pouches with a colour background corresponding to the respective product of the plaintiff with an infringing device similar to the green circle like representation of the plaintiff's label marks with the words 'Sona Pure Spices' which alongwith the said infringing device is printed in green colour, as found in paragraph 20 of the plaint. Even with regard to the averments in paragraph 21 of the plaint it can be stated that there is no specific denial of the averments about the defendant introducing similar or near identical plastic pouches like that of the plaintiff wherein addition to the infringing features the word 'SONA' has been written repeatedly in a diagonal fashion in white across the front panel of the impugned packet in the manner identical to that of the plaintiff. No doubt these averments have to be established by the plaintiff during the course of trial, but the version put forward as such has not been contraverted by factual details in the written statement and as such I feel the applicant/plaintiff has come forward with a prima facie case for injunction. 28. I have carefully and closely examined the packets which are made up of plastics and the packets are close resemblance to that of the plaintiff and as such I feel the case of the plaintiff that there is infringement of the plaintiff's copyright appears to be prima facie established. 29. The learned counsel for the respondent/defendant contended that the defendant's processor was Sona Spices Suppliers, and sole proprietory business was commenced by one Mr. J.J. Jindal and spices were sold under the Trade Mark Sona even from the year 1975 and the trade mark Sona has been continuously and extensively by the predecessor ever since 1975 and there was Agmark permission obtained in the year 1976. On Mr. Pawan Kumar Jain of Himachal Paper Products designed the art work for the labels, packets and other spice containers and the said Pawan Kumar conceived and designed the Sona Logo script and the bean shaped geometric device encircling the said logo script, and in the month of March, 1979 the defendant company was promoted and the proprietor became the Managing Director. Agmark registration was also renewed in the name of the defendant-company and on 7.10.1980 application was made for registration of Sona Spices logo, and thus according to the learned counsel for the respondent/defendant the respondent had started the business much earlier to the plaintiff and the plaintiff is a new comer to the field and even according to the plaintiff, the plaintiff had come into the business in the year 1980 only. No doubt even according to the plaint, copyright registration of the plaintiff is only form 1980. No doubt even according to the plaint, copyright registration of the plaintiff is only form 1980. But as shown earlier the defendant had changed the packets similar to that of the applicant/plaintiff is plastics with similar colour schemes and also get up so that the packets of the defendant are similar to that of the applicant/plaintiff thereby infringing the copyright of the plaintiff. It may also be pointed out at t his place that the respondent company was incorporated only on 8.3.79. In such circumstances, I feel the applicant/plaintiff is entitled to the order of injunction. 32. The learned counsel also placed reliance in the decision reported in Glaxo Operations UK Ltd. v. Samrat Pharmaceuticals, Kanpur 1984 (4) PTC 66, 1984 AIR(Delhi) 265). It is seen in that decision that the plaintiff-company had registered office at Bombay and local office at Delhi and the suit was filed in the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court held that as the plaintiff is carrying on business at Delhi, the suit is maintainable at Delhi having regard to section 62(2) of the Copyright Act. 33. The learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff also submitted that the respondent filed a suit before the District Court, Chandigarh against the applicant and also filed an appellation under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. praying for injunction restraining the plaintiff from using the word 'Sona' and also for passing off. It was contended by the present plaintiff that the application for injunction was opposed on the ground that registration of the trade mark of the respondent was obtained only in the year 1981. On the other hand, much earlier the defendant's products had been established in the market and they are using the word 'SONA' with their logo of Brooke Bond. The learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh was not pleased to accept the case put forwarded by the defendant herein and no injunction was granted as could be seen from the xerox copy of the order dated 17.5.1986. Pointing out the said order the learned counsel for the applicant also contended that it could be seen from the said order that the defendant himself complained off passing off against the plaintiff herein and that had not been accepted by the Court. So now it may not be open to the defendant to say anything as regards the contention put forward with regard to passing off. So now it may not be open to the defendant to say anything as regards the contention put forward with regard to passing off. Having regard to the fact that the packets of the defendant being similar to that of the applicant/plaintiff. I feel there is likelihood of confusion in the mind of the purchasers. 34. The learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant/plaintiff has no objection for the defendant selling the product in packets in which they were selling as shown at page 59/59 (a) and 60 in the plaintiff's typed set of papers and the plaintiff has got objection for the packets shown at page 64 which is similar to that of the plaintiff. On a careful consideration of the submissions made on either side I feel the plaintiff will be entitled to an order or temporary injunction as prayed for pending disposal of the suit. Accordingly the order passed in Application No. 3137 of 1990 on 16.7.90 is made absolute. 35. In the result, Application No. 9137 of 1990 is allowed. Interim injunction granted on 16.7.90 is made absolute. There will be no order as to costs.