2. Along with the suit was filed IA No.1248/2016 invoking Order 39
Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The prayer made
therein was to restrain Hamdard from selling the herbal sweeten syrup,
using the trademark ‘HAMDARD JAM-E-SHIRIN’.
3. Placed before a learned Single Judge of this Court, issuing
summons in the suit, upon the condition that being a foreign entity and
having no tangible assets in India, Qarshi should furnish security of the
value of `10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only), summons were issued to
Hamdard but ex-parte ad-interim injunction was declined; reasoning that
the mark ‘JAM-E-SHIRIN’ is highly descriptive of the product because
in Urdu language JAM means a drink and SHIRIN means cool or
something having a cooling effect. As per the learned Single Judge the
word ‘JAM-E-SHIRIN’ directly suggests that the product is a drink
having cooling effect. Learned Single Judge has opined that prima facie
the mark is not capable of registration under Section 9(1)(d) of the
Trademarks Act, 1999 as it conveys the characteristic of the goods.
There is an apparent typographic error because there is no clause (d) in
sub-Section (1) of Section 9 of the Trademarks Act, 1999. The learned
Single Judge has obviously referred to clause (b).
Source: Indian Kanoon