← Library
Madras High CourtWP/1163/2016disposed of

Ulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam v. The Registrar Of Companies

2021-10-04Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04-10-2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM WP No.1163 of 2016 And WMP No.900 of 2016 Ulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam, Represented by its General Secretary, R.Mathivanan having Registered Office at No.4, Sowrashtra Nagar, 7th Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai - 600 094.

..

Petitioner vs.

1.The Registrar of Companies, No.35, First Floor, Ilango Nagar, Pondicherry - 11.

2.Vulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam, Represented by its Honorary Secretary, Dr.Panch Ramalingam, No.17, 14th Street, Krishna Nagar, Pondicherry - 605 008.

3.Malathi Rajavelu, Honorary President, Vulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam, No.47, Ingnasi Mestri Street, Puducherry - 605 001.

4.Dr.Panch Ramalingam, Honorary Secretary, Vulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam, No.17, 14th Street, Krishna Nagar, Pondicherry - 605 008.

..

Respondents

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to issue appropriate directions to the respondents 2 to 4 from using the name Ulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam or International Movement for Tamil Culture to any other non identical name.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.K.Muthukumaar For Respondent-1 : Mr.C.Kathiravan, Government Advocate.

For Respondents-2to4 : Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first respondent to issue appropriate directions to the respondents 2 to 4 from using the name Ulaga Thamizh Panpattu Iyakkam or International Movement for Tamil Culture to any other non identical name.

2. Though the direction is sought for against the first respondent, the petitioner seeks further direction from the first respondent to restrain the respondents 2 to 4, who all are the Private Parties. However, regarding the usage of name, emblem etc., the parties are bound to establish their rights with reference to the documents and the evidences.

3. Unless the rights of the parties are crystallised, a direction in the matter of an injunction, cannot be granted. Thus, the petitioner has to establish their rights before the Competent Court of Law for issuing any directions against the respondents 2 to 4.

4. This being the factum, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Competent Court of Law for the redressal of their grievances.

5. With the abovesaid liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-CCC) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

Svn To The Registrar of Companies, No.35, First Floor, Ilango Nagar, Pondicherry - 11.

+1cc to Mr.G.K.Muthukumaar, Advocate SR.No.51799 WP 1163 of 2016 JPL(CO) GMY(22/10/2021)