Tulzapurkar has taken me through some pages of the annexures (pages 236, 244, 255, 256 and 261 amongst others) to show the similarity between the two services. Whatever may be the sales internationally, we are concerned with the domestic sales and these are used (as is common in such actions) to provide prima facie evidence of reputation and goodwill.ħ.

The plaint itself seems to indicate-in more than one place-that the sales of the Plaintiffs in any given year were rarely more than US$ 24,000 to 30,000.

Tulzapurkar claims that there are very high sales in India between 20. In the time since, it says it has built up a user or subscriber base of 550,000 users. It however claims that it had its first registered user in India on 23 July 2008. Plex obtained international trade mark registrations in several jurisdictions, but not India.

This means, and there is material even now to show this, that the user can ‘take his content wherever he goes’.Ħ. It appears that the Plex service is essentially software or combination of software and hardware that allows a user/subscriber to share media content over what is called a media server. Tulzapurkar claims that it adopted this mark in May 2008 in the United States. The Plaintiff (“Plex”) represented by Mr. I understand this to mean that new/fresh movie releases will be made available to subscribers but in a restricted manner such that the viewer must pay for each viewing, rather like buying a ticket to a cinema hall.ĥ. On 1 September 2020 it announced its proposed launch about a month later of a ‘cinema-to-home’ pay-per-view service. These channels are in different languages too. It has a number of media channels and services including internet, OTT, DTH, satellite, cable, etc. The Defendant (“Zee”) is a large multi-media conglomerate. The restraint sought by the Plaintiff is against the Defendant's use of the word ‘PLEX’ in an online movie channel service to be launched tomorrow, 2 October 2020. As I am considering this only at an ad-interim stage and then leaving it to the regular Bench to list the matter for a fuller hearing of the Interim Application, a shorter factual narrative will suffice.Ĥ. This is a quia timet action in passing off. The matter is listed for urgent ad interim reliefs before me as the regular Bench of the Hon'ble Mr. Patel, J.:- Heard through video conferencing.Ģ.

Zee plex free