https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283309 The court allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned order. The plaintiff was restrained from using the trade mark SEFLOX, or any deceptively similar mark, during the pendency of the suit. The decision was based on the prior user rights in a passing off action and the validity of the interim injunction sought by the defendant. en-us Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Sep 2019 12:37:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283309 The court allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned order. The plaintiff was restrained from using the trade mark SEFLOX, or any deceptively similar mark, during the pendency of the suit. The decision was based on the prior user rights in a passing off action and the validity of the interim injunction sought by the defendant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283309