Facts & Background:

• This case was a “Reference” under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
• The present suit, which sparked this reference, was about a bottle and the overall look of the "Carlsberg" mark, claiming both design infringement and passing off. The Defendant argued that these claims couldn't be combined in one suit, citing Mohan Lal vs Sona paints.
• The dispute between the parties was rendered moot by a mutually acceptable settlement. However, the Single Judge agreed to reconsider this issue and referred the matter to the Chief Justice, leading to the formation of this Special Bench.
• The Single Judge, in a 2017 order, referred to the Mohan Lal v. Sona Paint 2013 (55) PTC 61 (Del) (FB), where a Full Bench of three judges discussed the maintainability of a composite suit involving design infringement and passing off, with the same parties, considering Order II Rule 3 CPC. This rule allows the joinder of causes of action. This court agreed with Valmiki. J. Mehta, J.'s draft judgment and its analysis. However, the court felt it was important to add more reasons for recording the same conclusion. (Paragraph 1)
  

Main issue:

1. Whether the law requires the court to dismiss a plaint for misjoinder if two causes of action cannot be combined?
2. Whether the two causes of action - one for design infringement and the other for passing off - so distinct that the court cannot adjudicate them together in a single suit?