The application is supported by the affidavit of Mr. Rajan Shah, a Director of the Applicant
Company, filed in Court on 26/10/2004. The relevant particulars are contained in paragraphs
2 to 8 of the affidavit as follows:
„2. That the Applicant is the manufacturer of steel wool known as NCARISHA and has
been trading in the said product in Uganda since 1990 and has acquired substantial
reputation for the said product.
2. That the Respondents without any form of authority from the Applicant registered a
similar trade mark namely, „W&ARISHA” and started selling in Uganda (sic) with
very similar get up to those of the Applicant. A copy of the trade mark is attached as
annexture „A‟ and a copy of the offending product and the Applicants product are
attached as Exhibit „P1‟ and those of the Respondent as “D1”.
4. That the Applicant (sic) the Respondent continues to sell its offending products
under the WGARISHA‟ trade mark which fall short of the set standards, and which
are calculated to cause confusion in the market which passing off is causing
irreparable damage and loss to the Applicant, which no damages can atone for.
5. That the Applicants trade mark is in danger of being wasted and damaged by virtue
of such use by the Respondent if it is not stopped.
6. That there is a bona fide contention between the Applicant and the Respondent and
in the event of success the balance of inconvenience would be with the Applicant.
7. That on the facts before Court, the Applicant is entitled to relief by way of a
temporary injunction because the Applicant will suffer irreparable damage for which
damages cannot atone if the temporary injunction does not issue.
8. That in the interest of Justice, a temporary injunction should issue against the
Respondent to remove and desist from offering for sale the offending products from
The 1st Respondent‟s Managing Director Ramesh Kennedy filed an affidavit reply to this
affidavit dated 25/11/2004 stating as follows:
3. That the 1st Respondent is not aware of the facts stated in paragraph 2 but to the
contrary, the 2nd Respondent is the manufacturer of „NGARISHA „steel wool for