Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Amitabh Bachchan vs Rajat Nagi & Ors on 25 November, 2022

Author: Navin Chawla

Bench: Navin Chawla

                    $~15
                    *        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                    +        CS(COMM) 819/2022
                             AMITABH BACHCHAN                                       ..... Plaintiff
                                         Through:             Mr.Harish Salve, Sr. Adv. with
                                                              Mr.Pravin Anand, Mr.Ameet Naik,
                                                              Ms.Madhu     Gadolia,     Mr.Dhruv
                                                              Anand, Ms.Udita Patro, Mr.Sujoy
                                                              Mukherjee,    Ms.Nimrat       Singh,
                                                              Ms.Swati    Jain,    Ms.Sampurnaa
                                                              Sanyal,   Ms.Tarini,  Mr.Rashmin
                                                              Khandekar & Ms.Karishni Khanna,
                                                              Advs.

                                                versus

                             RAJAT NAGI & ORS.                                     ..... Defendants
                                           Through: Nemo.
                             CORAM:
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                                                ORDER

% 25.11.2022 I.A. 19730/2022

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking leave to file additional documents, which are not in the power, possession, control or custody of the plaintiff at the moment.

3. The plaintiff may file the additional documents strictly in accordance with the provisions of the law.

4. The application stands disposed of.

5. By the present application, the plaintiff seeks exemption from filing notarized affidavit under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Order XI Rule 6(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as applicable to commercial disputes.

6. In the application, it is stated that the authorised signatory was travelling abroad and, therefore, was not physically available for signing and getting the said affidavit notarized. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that such affidavit shall be filed within a period of one week from today.

7. In view of the above, exemption is granted subject to the condition that such affidavit is filed within a period of one week from today.

8. This application has been filed seeking exemption from initiating pre- institution mediation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

9. Having perused the contents of the application, the same is allowed.

10. This is an application seeking enlargement of time for filing of the court fees.

11. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the court fee has been filed.

12. Accordingly, the application is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

CS(COMM) 819/2022

13. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

14. Issue summons to the defendants to be served through all permitted modes, including electronically, returnable on 20th March, 2023 before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial).

15. The summons to the defendants shall indicate that the written statement(s) to the plaint shall be positively filed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statement(s), the defendants shall also file the affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.

16. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file the replication(s) within a period of four weeks of the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication(s), if any, filed by the plaintiff, the affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the defendants be filed by the plaintiff, without which the replication(s) shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.

17. Issue Notice.

18. On the plaintiff taking steps, let notice be served on the defendants through all permissible modes, including electronically, returnable on 20 th March, 2023 before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial).

19. Let reply to the application be filed by the defendants within a period of four weeks of receipt of the notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks thereafter.

20. By this application, the plaintiff alleges violation of his 'publicity rights as a celebrity' as has also been recognised by this Court in its Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:25.11.2022 19:11:24 judgment in Titan Industries Ltd. v. M/s. Ramkumar Jewellers, 2012 SCC OnLine Del 2382. It cannot seriously be disputed that the plaintiff is a well- known personality and is also represented in various advertisements. The plaintiff is aggrieved by the defendants' unauthorized use of his celebrity status to promote their own goods and services, without his permission or authorization. Details of such violations are being explained by the plaintiff in the plaint along with the documents in support thereof.

21. Having considered the contents of the plaint, the documents filed therewith, as also having heard the learned senior counsel for the plaintiff, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has been able to make out a good prima facie case in its favour for grant of an ad-interim ex-parte injunction. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The defendants appear to be using plaintiff's celebrity status for promoting their own activities, without his authorization or permission. The plaintiff is, therefore, likely to suffer grave irreparable harm and injury of his reputation. In fact, some of the activities complained of may also bring disrepute to him.

22. In view of the above, there shall be an ad-interim ex-parte order of injunction in terms of paragraph no.32(i) and (ii) of the application in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. Directions in terms of paragraph no.32(iii) and (iv) of the application are also issued to the necessary statutory authorities as also the Telecom Service Providers.

23. Compliance with Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 be made within a period of two days from today.

24. Issue Notice.

25. On the plaintiff taking steps, let notice be served on the defendants through all permissible modes, including electronically, returnable on 20 th March, 2023 before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial).

26. Let a reply to the application be filed by the defendants within a period of four weeks of receipt of the notice. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks thereafter.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J NOVEMBER 25, 2022/rv/AB/Ais Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:25.11.2022 19:11:24