judge clarified that these are tentative observations made only for the purpose of deciding on the trust’s prayer for in interim restraining order. A final decision is yet to be made. The case will be heard next in September. Advocate Ramesh Ganapathy appeared for the plaintiff trust today. Senior Advocate Vijay Narayan represented TVK and Vijay. [18/08, 17:22] Sekarreporter: Adv gowtham assist senior adv vijayanarayanan for tvk

[18/08, 17:24] Sekarreporter: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxzFTbtEd6jtbYJTz0UYsJGYhX-81djFAQ?si=qbQqP81VOd2lstrl
[18/08, 17:24] Sekarreporter: [18/08, 17:21] Sekarreporter: n a major relief for actor Vijay and his political party Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), the Madras High Court on Monday rejected a plea to pass an interim order restraining the party from using its current flag [GB Pachaiyappan v. Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam].

Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy was hearing a case involving accusations of copyright and trademark infringement and passing off in relation to the flag’s design.

The single-judge said that he was prima facie not convinced that the TVK flag was copied from a flag used by Thondai Mandala Saandror Dharma Paribalana Sabai – a Trust run by one GB Pachaiyappan.

“On prima facie comparison, it cannot be said that the defendant’s flag is a substantial copy of the plaintiffs’ flag. Therefore, I reject the claim for relief with respect to alleged infringement of copyright … Significantly, plaintiffs do not have separate (trademark) registration for the colour combination.. It is, no doubt, true that essential features of a mark may be considered … Even so, on prima facie comparison, I find that the colour schemes cannot be characterised as the essential feature. While minute comparison is not warranted, even when examined from perspective of a person of average intelligence and imperfect recollection availing services of the plaintiffs, it cannot be said that the use of the impugned flag is likely to cause deception or confusion among the public. All that remains, is request for relief for alleged passing off … It is not possible to conclude that plaintiffs have established reputation and goodwill in relation to plaintiff’s flag. For such reasons.. request for relief in relation to alleged passing off is also denied,” the Court said in its interim order today.

However, the judge clarified that these are tentative observations made only for the purpose of deciding on the trust’s prayer for in interim restraining order. A final decision is yet to be made. The case will be heard next in September.

Advocate Ramesh Ganapathy appeared for the plaintiff trust today. Senior Advocate Vijay Narayan represented TVK and Vijay.
[18/08, 17:22] Sekarreporter: Adv gowtham assist senior adv vijayanarayanan for tvk