29 through the legal process. I therefore decline to make any such order because it has no legal basis. If the 2nd and 3rd defendants wish to register their trademark in Uganda let formally apply under the law. I also decline to grant the prayer for a permanent injunction restraining the plaintiff from using of all PANASUPER and PAN SUPER brands because as I stated above the right to exclusive use of a trademark is only given by registration but the 2nd & 3rd defendants are not registered proprietors of the mark in Uganda. On punitive and exemplary damages, it was submitted for the defendants that upon this suit coming up for hearing the parties were advised by court to have the matter settled out of court however the plaintiff was not willing to settle well knowing that it was not importing or manufacturing PANASUPER brands and as such, the plaintiff should pay punitive damages. This submission was supported by the holding of Madrama, J in Angela Katatumba vs AntiCorruption Coalition of Uganda HCCS No. 307 of 2011 that punitive or additional damages may be awarded where the court considers the flagrancy of the infringement and any benefit accruing to the defendant by reason of the infringement. I have considered my finding that the plaintiff has not infringed the 2nd and 3rd defendants’ trademark, and I do find that the circumstances of this case does not merit award of exemplary/punitive damages. I therefore decline to award the same. As regards general damages, it is my finding that the 1st defendant was greatly inconvenienced by the plaintiff’s fraudulent registration of the suit trademark in Uganda for two reasons. Firstly, at one point the plaintiff obtained an interim order restraining the 1st defendant from importing and dealing in PANASUPER batteries manufactured and supplied by the 2nd and 3rd defendants. Although that interim order was subsequently set aside by this court, the defendants’ business had been interrupted for sometime. Secondly, this court upon application by the plaintiff, granted an Anton Pillar order authorising the plaintiff to enter upon the 1st defendant’s business premises with the purpose of inspecting all the goods and items sold and branded under the brand PAN SUPER and remove the unauthorised products/items into the custody of this court. Because of the above inconveniences, I have found it necessary to award general damages of Shs. 10,000,000/= (Ten million shillings 29