Marico Limited vs Ashok Kumar (Unknown Person/S) on 5 January, 2022

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Marico Limited vs Ashok Kumar (Unknown Person/S) on 5 January, 2022

Bench: N. J. Jamadar

Tandale                                            22-IA(L)-26713-2021 in Comip(L)-26707-2021.odt



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                     IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

              INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 26713 OF 2021
                                  IN
               COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 26707 OF 2021
                                WITH
                 LEAVE PETITION (L) NO. 26715 OF 2021
                                WITH
               COURT RECEIVER'S REPORT NO. 499 OF 2021

Marico Ltd.                                      ... Applicant/Plaintiff
     V/s.
Ashok Kumar                                      ... Defendant

Mr. V. A. Bhagat, Advocate for the Applicant/Plaintiff.
Mr. Harshad Inamdar, Advocate for the Defendant No.2.
Mr. Satyajeet P. Dighe, Advocate for Defendant No.3.


                                     CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATED : 5th JANUARY, 2022.

(Through Video Conferencing) P.C. :

1. Heard Mr. Bhagat, the learned counsel for the Applicant/plaintiff.

2. Mr.Bhagat, the learned counsel for the plaintiff has tendered the schedule of draft amendment.

3. Mr. Bhagat, the learned counsel submits that pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 24 th November 2021, the Court Receiver executed his Commission. During the course of execution of the Commission, the identity of the persons who were found infringing the plaintiff's trade 1/3 Tandale 22-IA(L)-26713-2021 in Comip(L)-26707-2021.odt mark and copyright, has been revealed. The suit is an action for infringement of trade mark and copyright, combined with an of action in passing off.

4. Since the identity of the alleged infringers is now established, it is necessary to implead them as party defendants and make a requisite averments in the plaint, submits Mr.Bhagat.

5. From the perusal of the material on record, especially the Court Receiver's Report, the submission on behalf of the plaintiff appears to carry conviction. Since the identity of the alleged infringers is revealed, in order to determine all questions in controversy between the parties the proposed amendment is necessary.

6. Hence the plaintiff is allowed to amend the plaint in accordance with the schedule of draft amendment.

7. Necessary amendment be carried out within a period of one week from today.

Re-verification is dispensed with.

8. Mr. Inamdar, the learned counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of defendant No.2 i.e. Mr. Chandrakant Gholap and undertakes to file Vakalatnama within a period of two days.

9. Mr. Inamdar, the learned counsel waives notice of Interim Application for defendant No.2.

Let the Vakalatnama be filed on behalf of defendant No.2 on or 2/3 Tandale 22-IA(L)-26713-2021 in Comip(L)-26707-2021.odt before 10th January 2022.

10. Mr. Dighe, the learned counsel for the defendant submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of defendant No.3 i.e. Mr. Pankaj Shah and, in fact, the defendant No.3 has already moved an Interim Application to release the machinery seized by the Court Receiver pursuant to the order dated 24th November 2021.

11. List on 12th January 2022.

12. Interim order granted by this Court on 24 th November 2021, shall continue to operate qua the newly impleaded defendants as well till 12 th January 2022.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] Digitally signed by MANOJ R MANOJ R TANDALE TANDALE Date:

2022.01.07 10:29:21 +0530 3/3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court