JUDGMENT M.Sundar, J. Mr.Arun C.Mohan, learned counsel on record for sole plaintiff and Mr.R.Sathish Kumar, learned counsel on record for both the defendants are before this Commercial Division. 2. By consent of both the learned counsel, the main suit itself is taken up for disposal. 3. Before I proceed further, it is necessary to record that both aforesaid learned counsel drew my attention to Order XIII-A of amended 'The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908' ('C.P.C.' for brevity) as amended by 'The Commercial Courts Act, 2015' ('said Act' for brevity). 4. Both learned counsel, drew my attention to Rule 3 of Order XIII-A of amended C.P.C. as amended by said Act. Rule 3 of Order XIII-A of amended C.P.C., reads as follows: 'The Court may give a summary judgment against a plaintiff or defendant on a claim if it considers that- (a) the plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding on th claim or the defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim, as the case may be; and (b) there is no other compelling reason why the claim should not be disposed of before recording of oral evidence.' 5. Both learned counsel drew my attention to the aforesaid provision to buttress and bolster their submission that in the instant case, in the light of the stated position of the defendants and in the light of the trajectory of the suit, the defendants have no real prospect of successfully defending the claim and there is no other compelling reason as to why the claim of the plaintiff should not be disposed of before recording oral evidence. 6. I shall refer to the stated position of the defendants and the trajectory this suit has taken infra elsewhere in this judgment. 7. Before I do that, it is necessary to set out a thumb nail sketch of the factual matrix in the instant suit. 8. Common submissions made by learned counsel on both sides are that this suit pertains to a complaint of infringement of registered trademark, passing off and infringement of copyright. Besides this complaint, the prayer paragraph in the plaint contains usual prayers pertaining to surrender of offending goods, claim for damages, accounts, and costs, besides a usual residuary limb. 9. I deem it appropriate to extract the entire prayer paragraph in the plaint. Besides this complaint, the prayer paragraph in the plaint contains usual prayers pertaining to surrender of offending goods, claim for damages, accounts, and costs, besides a usual residuary limb. 9. I deem it appropriate to extract the entire prayer paragraph in the plaint. To be noted, prayer paragraph in the plaint is paragraph No.23 and the same reads as follows: '(a) grant a permanent injunction restraining the defendants themselves, its proprietor/directors/partners as the case may be,successors-in-business, servants, agents, distributors, dealers, stockists, shop keepers, wholesalers, retailers, representatives, assigns and all other persons claiming through or under them from infringing the registered trademarks/labels VSG & NANDU of the plaintiff by manufacturing, selling and/or distributing lungies and other textile goods under identical marks VSG & NANDU or any other similar or identical mark and in any other manner whatsoever; (b) grant a permanent injunction restraining the defendants themselves, its proprietor/directors/partners as the case may be,successors-in-business, servants, agents, distributors, dealers, stockists, shop keepers, wholesalers, retailers, representatives, assigns and all other persons claiming through or under them from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale and/or distributing lungies and other textile goods which would amount to passing off their goods as and for the goods of plaintiff by using the identical marks VSG & NANDU or any other similar or identical mark and artistic work and in any other manner whatsoever. (c) grant a permanent injunction restraining the defendants themselves, its proprietor/directors/partners as the case may be,successors-in-business, servants, agents, distributors, dealers, stockists, shop keepers, wholesalers, retailers, representatives, assigns and all other persons claiming through or under them from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale and/or distributing lungies and other textile goods from committing acts of copyright infringement by ditto copying the plaintiff's copyright in the artistic works VSG & NANDU labels by use of identical VSG & NANDU labels, colour scheme, get up and placement of features or any other label similar or identical thereto and in any other manner whatsoever. (d) the defendants be ordered to surrender to the plaintiff for destruction all goods viz., lungies, blocks, dyes, prints, labels, cartons, screen prints, cylinders and other materials and goods containing the trademarks VSG & NANDU or any other mark similar to plaintiffs registered trademarks and labels VSG & NANDU; (e) the defendants be ordered to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as damages for committing acts of infringement of trademark, infringement of copyright and passing off: (f) a preliminary decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff directing the defendants to render true and faithful account of profits earned by them by use of trademarks VSG & NANDU for lungies and other textile goods , which is identical to the plaintiffs registered trademarks and labels VSG & NANDU and a final decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by the defendants after the latter has rendered accounts. (g) for entire costs of the suit; and (h) for such further and other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.' 10. Detailing qua the two registered trademarks and one registered copyright in favour of plaintiff, on which this entire suit is pivoted are as follows: TM No Date Class Description Goods 885294 04.11.1999 24 NANDU BRAND Label Textile piece goods, including lungies, sarongs, dhoties, sarees and handkerchiefs 966106 24/10/2000 24 VSG Label Textile piece goods, including lungies, sarongs, dhoties, sarees and handkerchief 11. The copyright registration certificate on which also this suit is pivoted is dated 22.08.2002, registration number is A-61838/2001, it is registered as an artistic work and the title of the work is 'NANDU BRAND'. Registered label as contained in the copyright registration certificate is as follows: xxx xxx 12. With regard to defendants, this Commercial Division is informed that the first defendant is one Mr.A.Nagaraj, Son of ('S/o' for brevity) V.Arunachalam, carrying on business in the name and style 'Maruthi Tex', as a sole Proprietor and the second defendant is one Mr.M.R.Senthil, S/o.Raju, carrying on business in the name and style 'Gokul Offset', as a sole Proprietor. 13. Both defendants have filed separate affidavits. Both affidavits are dated 11.10.2018. The affidavit filed by first defendant reads as follows: A.Nagaraj, S/o.V.Arunchalam, aged about 53 years, now temporarily come down to Chennai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows: (1) I am the first defendant in the present suit and as such and I am well acquainted with the facts of the case and I am competent to swear this affidavit. (2) I state that the plaintiff had filed the suit for infringement of trademark VSG & NANDU Labels. (2) I state that the plaintiff had filed the suit for infringement of trademark VSG & NANDU Labels. I state that this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant injunction against us and also appointed an Advocate Commission vide A.No. 5269/2016. Accordingly, the said advocate commissioner also visited our premises and on explaining the case had also seized the materials bearing the trademarks VSG and NANDU and the same has been kept under lock and key in my premises itself. (3) I further undertake to remove all labels of VSG and/or Nandu from the products seized by the Advocate Commissioner of this Hon'ble Court and remove all references to plaintiff's trademark or copyright in VSG and NANDU whatsoever, which is the subject matter of the suit from the lungies. On such removal, I humbly request and pray this Hon'ble Court to kindly permit me to use the said lungies in the market without any reference to the plaintiff's trademark or copyright in the artistic work VSG or NANDU or any other trademark or copyright deceptively similar thereto whatsoever. (4) I state that upon legal advice, I state that we have not used the trademark VSG and/or NANDU since the order of this Hon'ble Court has been communicated to us and further undertake that I would henceforth not use the plaintiff's trademark and/or copyright in the artistic work VSG,NANDU or any other trademark and/or copyright identical or similar to VSG or NANDU of the plaintiff herein. In the circumstances, I respectfully submit and pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a judgment and decree taking the aforesaid undertaking on record and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.' 14. The affidavit filed by the second defendant reads as follows: 'M.R.Senthil, S/o.Raju, aged about 48 years, now temporarily come down to Chennai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows: (1) I am the 2nd defendant in the present suit and as such and I am well acquainted with the facts of the case and I am competent to swear this affidavit. I am a printer who had printed the said labels which are the subject matter of the suit herein. (2) I state that the plaintiff had filed the suit for infringement of trademark VSG & NANDU Labels. I am a printer who had printed the said labels which are the subject matter of the suit herein. (2) I state that the plaintiff had filed the suit for infringement of trademark VSG & NANDU Labels. I state that this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant injunction against us and also appointed an Advocate Commission vide A.No. 5269/2016. Accordingly, the said advocate commissioner also visited our premises and on explaining the case had also seized the materials bearing the trademarks VSG and NANDU and the same has been kept under lock and key in the premises of Maruthi Tex itself. (3) I state that upon legal advice, I state that we have not printed the labels bearing the trademark VSG and/or NANDU since the order of this Hon'ble Court has been communicated to us and further undertake that I would henceforth not print labels bearing the plaintiff's trademark and/or copyright in the artistic work VSG,NANDU or any other trademark and/or copyright identical or similar to VSG or NANDU of the plaintiff herein. In the circumstances, I respectfully submit and pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a judgment and decree taking the aforesaid undertaking on record and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.' 15. Both the defendants i.e., Mr.A.Nagaraj, S/o.V.Arunachalam and Mr.M.R.Senthil, S/o.Raju are present in Court. Both of them reiterate the contents of the aforesaid affidavits. 16. To be noted, along with the affidavit, a attested photo copies of the photo identity cards of the deponents have also been annexed. To be noted, pan card of the first defendant Mr.A.Nagaraj and driving license of second defendant Mr.M.R.Senthil have been annexed. 17. The stated position of the defendants emanates from the aforesaid two sworn affidavits dated 11.10.2018 filed by the first and second defendants. 18. From the stated position of the defendants that emanates from the aforesaid two affidavits, it emerges clearly that defendants have no real prospect of successfully defending the claim in the suit. 17. The stated position of the defendants emanates from the aforesaid two sworn affidavits dated 11.10.2018 filed by the first and second defendants. 18. From the stated position of the defendants that emanates from the aforesaid two affidavits, it emerges clearly that defendants have no real prospect of successfully defending the claim in the suit. Equally, there is no other impediment or compelling reason as to why the claim of the plaintiff should not be disposed of without recording oral evidence (particularly when both defendants are present in person before this Commercial Division and when they reiterate the contents of their sworn affidavits) in the light of the aforesaid trajectory of the litigation. To be noted, I have captured the trajectory of the litigation thus far as well as the hearing today. 19. In the aforesaid scenario, both learned counsel on instructions from the respective parties make a common/joint request that this suit may be decreed in terms of Sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the plaint prayer paragraph [paragraph No.23, which has been extracted and reproduced supra]. Learned counsel for plaintiff, on instructions, submits that he is giving up Sub-paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) of the plaint prayer paragraph in the plaint i.e., paragraph No.23 which has been extracted and reproduced supra. 20. Before I accede to the request, there is one aspect of the matter which needs to be recorded. 21. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed in A.No.5269 of 2016 and the Advocate Commissioner has filed a report dated 10.11.2016 along with a typed set of even date containing six documents therein. Serial No.6 therein is an inventory of the goods found in the premises of the defendants and the same reads as follows: SEIZURE LIST 19.10.2016 1. V.S.G. NANDU LABEL (BIG SIZE) X STICKERS 11500 Nos. 23 BUNDLES X 500 NOS 2. V.S.G LABELS (SMALL) 4 BUNDLES X 100 400 Nos. 3. V.S.G LUNGIES 300 Nos. 15 X 20 Entered into house at 11.45 A.M. and completed on 1.15 P.M. The above said items are packed and sealed. WITNESS: (1) (S/D) S.Karthik, Ph.No.9941819944 (2) (s/d) A.Sivakumar 9442836617 16, Maraimalai Adikal St Surampatty (P.O.) Erode 638009. SEIZURE LIST 19.10.2016 1. NANDU EMBOSS BLOCK 1 NO 2. VANDU EMBOSS BLOCK 4 NOS+1 NO=5 NOS 3. NANDU FOIL PLATE 1 NO 4. VSG FOIL PLATE 1 NO 5. WITNESS: (1) (S/D) S.Karthik, Ph.No.9941819944 (2) (s/d) A.Sivakumar 9442836617 16, Maraimalai Adikal St Surampatty (P.O.) Erode 638009. SEIZURE LIST 19.10.2016 1. NANDU EMBOSS BLOCK 1 NO 2. VANDU EMBOSS BLOCK 4 NOS+1 NO=5 NOS 3. NANDU FOIL PLATE 1 NO 4. VSG FOIL PLATE 1 NO 5. STICKERS COUNTERFIE VANDU - 3 NOS +1 NO=4 NOS NANDU - 5 NOS KADALERA - 1 NO + 1 NO=2NOS These are the items of sealed & seized at the time of 11.55 P.M in 19.10.2016 Entered at 8.15 P.M and the inspection finished on 11.55 P.M at 19.10.2016 GOKUL OFFSET PRINTERS KASTHURI OFFSET PRINTERS SAKTHI GANAPATHY are belongs to Mr.M.R.SENTHIL S/o Raja WITNESS 1. (S/d) R.Selvam, S/o.Raju 2. (s/d) S.Karthik Ph.No.9941819944' 22. It is agreed between both the learned counsel that with regard to the aforesaid goods, enumeration of which is found in the inventory [which has been extracted and reproduced supra], the offending labels will be removed within a fortnight from today and defendants undertake to handover the labels to the plaintiff along with the foils and blocks. This undertaking is recorded. 23. In the light of the narrative supra, this suit is decreed in terms of Sub-paragraphs (a),(b) and (c) of paragraph No.23 of the plaint, which is the prayer paragraph. As mentioned supra, Sub-paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) of paragraph No.23 of the plaint, which is the prayer paragraph, is given up by plaintiff. There shall be no order as to costs. All connected interlocutory applications are closed. 24. Suit is decreed on above terms. The aforesaid two affidavits dated 11.10.2018 filed by two defendants together with the annexed photo identity cards of the deponents shall form part of the decree.