Madras High Court
Strides Arcolab Limited vs Dr.A.Ramamurthy on 6 October, 2009
Bench: M.Chockalingam, R.Subbiah
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 06.10.2009 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice M.CHOCKALINGAM and The Honourable Mr.Justice R.SUBBIAH Original Side Appeal Nos.235, 327 and 328 of 2009, M.P.No.1 of 2009 in OSA No.327 of 2009, M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2009 in OSA No.328 of 2009 and C.S.No.75 of 2009 1. Strides Arcolab Limited, 'Strides House', Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore-560 076. 2. Grandix Pharmaceuticals Limited, Jamals Sonu Terrace", No.42, Loganathan Nagar, 100 ft.Road, Choolaimedu, Chennai-600 094. 3. Grandix Laboratories Limited, Jamalsm Sony Terrace". No.42, Loganathan Nagar, 100 ft.Road, Choolaimedu, Chennai-600 094. ..Appellants in all O.S.As./ Plaintiffs in the suit ..vs.. 1. Dr.A.Ramamurthy 2. Malathy Ramamurthy 3. Regenix Drugs Ltd., Mount Chambers, Ground Floor, 758, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 4. Supermed Pharmacy (P) Ltd., Mount Chambers, Ground Floor, 758A, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 5. Huclin Research Limited, Mount Chambers, 758-A, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 6. Bharati Life Sciences Pvt.Ltd., 42 Olympus Bldg., 5th Floor, 149 Perin, Nariman Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 001. ..Respondents in all O.S.As./ Defendants in the suit O.S.A.No.235 of 2009 filed under Order XXXVI, Rule 9 of the Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 08.06.2009 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in O.A.No.89 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009. O.S.A.No.327 of 2009 filed under Order XXXVI, Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, against the order dated 04.03.2009 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in O.A.No.88 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009. O.S.A.No.328 of 2009 filed under Order XXXVI, Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, against the order dated 04.03.2009 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in O.A.No.89 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009. Civil Suit filed under Order IVI Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 C.P.C.read with Order IV Rule I of Original Side Rules read with Sections 27, 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, for the reasons stated therein. For Appellants/ : Mr.Arvind P.Datar, Senior Counsel Plaintiffs for Mr.R.Senthil Kumar For Respondents/ : Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy,Senior Counsel Defendants for Mr.S.Suresh for R1 to R5 M/s.Surana & Surana for R6 COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.,) Pending suit for damages and permanent injunction, the plaintiffs filed applications for interim injunction. Accordingly, at the time of initiation of proceedings, ad-interim injunction was granted ex parte and it was sought to be vacated and thereafter, it was vacated so far as against respondents 1 to 5 and independently against the 6th respondent are concerned and thus, an occasion arose for filing three intra-court appeals, namely, O.S.A.No.235 of 2009 filed against the order dated 08.06.2009 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in O.A.No.89 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009; O.S.A.No.327 of 2009 filed against the order dated 04.03.2009 in O.A.No.88 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009; and O.S.A.No.328 of 2009 filed against the order dated 04.03.2009 in O.A.No.89 of 2009 in C.S.No.75 of 2009.
2. When all the appeals are taken up for enquiry, it was represented by the learned senior counsel on either side that the suit claim itself has been settled and they are filing Joint Memorandum of Compromise in C.S.No.75 of 2009 and it has got to be recorded. In view of the same, the Registry was directed to bring forth the case bundle in C.S.No.75 of 2009 and accordingly, the same was brought forth.
The joint Memorandum of Compromise is recorded and the suit is disposed of in terms of the said memorandum of compromise. Even an endorsement has been made by the appellants' side in the grounds of appeal in O.S.A.No.235 of 2009 that the said three appeals may be disposed of in terms of the memorandum of compromise. In view of the recording of memorandum of compromise and the disposal of the suit itself, all the intra-court appeals does not require consideration and in view of the terms of the memorandum of compromise, all the appeals are disposed of and the said Memorandum of Compromise shall form part of the case papers. Consequently, connected M.Ps.are closed.
gl