IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 11TH APRIL 2011 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1933 FAO.No. 120 of 2011() -------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11/03/2011 IN I.A.1193/2010 IN O.S.NO. 5/2010 of DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT ------------------------------------------------------------ SUNILKUMAR, S/O.YASODHARAN, PROPIETOR, M/S.LOTUS PALMY REGENCY ALAPPUZHA RESIDING AT INDRAPRASTHAM, PUNNAPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------------------------------- MERCY BIGI, W/O.BIGI MATHEW, KUTTICHIRA HOUSE, AVALOOKKUNNU, PROPRIETRIX, M/S.PALMY RESIDENCY, ALAPPUZHA REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, BIGI MATHEW, S/O.K.L.MATHEW, KUTTICHIRA HOUSE, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O PIN-688 006. BY THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts F.A.O.NO.120/2011 ORDER ON I.A.NO.1244/2011 IN F.A.O.NO.120/2011 CLOSED 11/04/2011 SD/- HARUN-UL- RASHID, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ F.A.O.No.120 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 11th day of April, 2011. J U D G M E N T The appeal is directed against the order dated 11.03.2011 in I.A.No.1193/2010 in O.S.No.5/2010 on the file of the District Court, Alappuzha. The matter relates to the infringement of trade name. The learned Judge after hearing both sides allowed the I.A and temporarily injuncted the respondent in the I.A from using the trade mark. 2. Following the decision reported in Shree Vardhman Rice & General Mills v. Amar Singh Chawalwala, the Apex Court in Bajaj Auto Limited v. TVS Motor Company Limited (2009(9) SCC 797) directed the trial court to dispose of the suit at the earliest opportunity. Without going into the merits of the controversy, this Court directs the court below to hear and dispose of the case, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, untrammelled by any of the observations made in the impugned order. ::2:: F.A.O.No.120 Of 2011 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that petition for violation of the injunction order are pending consideration. In view of the directions issued for disposal of the suit the said petition shall be tried along with the suit. The appeal is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-