Facts:

• The Appellant, P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. (PPJPL), was a renowned manufacturer of jewellery, precious metals, and stones, with significant goodwill and reputation in the industry. They had been using the marks "PP," "PP Jewellers," and "PPJ" extensively since 1980, and these trademarks had become associated exclusively with their business.
• The Respondents, M/s P.P. Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. and M/s P.P. Prime Properties and Promoters Pvt. Ltd., were accused of trademark infringement and passing off. PPJPL had filed suits against them for using similar marks, allegedly causing confusion and encroaching upon PPJPL's established goodwill and trademark rights.
• The suits had been filed in the Delhi High Court under CS (OS) No. 19/2005 and CS (OS) No. 604/2008, respectively, seeking injunctions under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC. However, the applications had been dismissed.
• Hence, the present appeals were raised before the court.
  

Background:

These appeals in present case arose from a common judgment dated September 24, 2009, in IA No. 132/2005 in CS (OS) No. 19/2005 titled "P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. P.P. Buildwell Pvt. Ltd." and IA No. 4048/2008 in CS (OS) No. 604/2008 titled "P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. P.P. Prime Properties and Promoters Pvt. Ltd." The applications under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, filed by the Appellant P.P. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "PPJPL"), were dismissed.

Main issue:

Whether the findings of the Learned Single Judge were perverse?