The Court also reiterated that when the defendant, in spite of being served with an injunction order, chooses not to contest the suit, the same fortifies that they are indulging in activities complained of.
Applying the same to the present case, the Court observed,
“Considering the fact that the plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the ‘VISTARA Marks’ and none has entered appearance for the defendant, this Court is of the opinion that the defendant has no justification for the adoption of an identical trade mark for sale of their goods.”
Source: Barandbench
