ORDER : 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for injunction, infringement of trade mark and name and damages filed by the appellant against the defendant/respondent in this appeal. The plaintiff's case in the suit was that appellant Infosys Technologies Limited has got its trade mark "Infosys" registered under Number 475269 in Class 16 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 in respect of computer stationery, computer manuals, printed matter for computer instructions and teaching material. Its further case is that another application in mark Infosys being application No. 475267 dated 15.7.1987 in Class 9 is in respect of computer hardware, computer interfaces, computer peripherals, electronic telex interfaces and all goods covered in Class 9 has been filed and is pending registration. Two similar other applications being application Nos. 637314 and 637315 both dated 18.8.1994 in Class 16 in respect of computer software, stationery, manuals, printed matter, brochure, instructional and teaching material and Class 9 in respect of computer hardware, data modules, motion control devices, warehouse management system, customer service management systems as used in banks, automatic teller machines, etc are also pending registration. 2. The grievance of the plaintiff/appellant in the above background was against incorporation of the defendant in name of Innovative Infosys Private Limited in which the key and the most prominent feature of its name is identical to the most significant portion of the plaintiff's corporate name i.e. Infosys. According to the plaintiff, the defendant had not started its business and therefore deserved to be restrained from using the trade name of the plaintiff/appellant. 3. The defendant, it appears, did not appear before the Trial Court to contest the suit. Even so, Trial Court has vide its judgment and decree impugned in this appeal dismissed the suit holding that the two trade names are different and that Innovative Infosys is different from Infosys which is a registered trade mark of the plaintiff/appellant. The present appeal calls in question the correctness of the said judgment and appeal. 4. Mrs. S. Janani has today entered appearance on behalf of all the respondents and filed a reply. In para 6 thereof, it is stated as under: 6. The present appeal calls in question the correctness of the said judgment and appeal. 4. Mrs. S. Janani has today entered appearance on behalf of all the respondents and filed a reply. In para 6 thereof, it is stated as under: 6. "That the appeal is liable to be dismissed with cost also for the reason that keeping with an evolutionary need both relating to the role and status of company it was converted from Pvt. Ltd. to Public Ltd. company in 1995. At that time since the prime areas of focus for the company covered a combination of information and Multimedia technologies the name of the company was accordingly modified from "Innovative Infosys Pvt. Ltd." to Media "Innovative Info Media Ltd." 5. It is evident from the above, that the defendants have already brought about a change in the name of their company and instead of Innovative Infosys Limited, it is now registered as Innovative Info Media Limited. Mr. Manmohan Singh submits that in light of the said subsequent development which is evident even from a copy of the fresh certificate of incorporation, the controversy in this suit no longer survives for any adjudication. He submits that in view of the change brought about by the defendants, the plaintiff/appellant would withdraw the suit filed by him and reserve liberty to file a fresh suit for appropriate redress should there be any violation of the trade mark or the name held by the plaintiff. 6. In the circumstances, therefore, we set aside the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and allow the plaintiff to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit should an occasion to do so arises in future. The suit shall accordingly stand dismissed as withdrawn and the present appeal disposed of. No costs. Appeal disposed of.