Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Unichem Laboratories Ltd vs India Mart Intermesh Ltd. & Ors on 19 February, 2019

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan

                                                                          #4
$~
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     CS(COMM) 1243/2018 & I.A. 15993/2018

      UNICHEM LABORATORIES LTD. ..... Plaintiff
                  Through  Mr. Sachin Gupta with Ms. Jasleen
                           Kaur and Mr. Pratyush Rao,
                           Advocates

                         versus

      INDIA MART INTERMESH LTD. & ORS. ..... Defendants
                    Through Mr. Nitin Sharma with Ms. Snehima
                            Jauhari and Mr. Sohrab Singh Maan,
                            Advocates for D-1.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

                   ORDER

% 19.02.2019 Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, unfair competition, rendition of accounts/damages and delivery up.

At the outset, learned counsel for the plaintiff wishes to delete John Doe defendant nos. 2 to 5 (Ashok Kumars), from the present proceedings. He, however, prays that this Court may grant liberty to the plaintiff to seek restoration of the present suit against the said defendants after Goa and Mumbai Cyber Cells conclude their investigations.

In the opinion of this Court, the request made by learned counsel for the plaintiff is fair and reasonable. Accordingly, defendant nos. 2 to 5 are deleted from the array of parties. Let an amended memo of parties be filed within two days.

Learned counsel for defendant no.1-India Mart states that the defendant no. 1 has already taken necessary action of delisting the impugned listings notified by the plaintiff. He further undertakes to this Court that the defendant no. 1 will continue to do the same as and when the plaintiff notifies the impugned listings to the said defendant.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that he has no objection if the present suit is decreed in accordance with the aforesaid statements and undertakings given by learned counsel for defendant no. 1, provided the defendant no. 1 also agrees to share all details, including bank account details if any available with it, of the people behind the impugned listings.

Learned counsel for the defendant no. 1 has no objection to the same, provided the plaintiff uses the said information for legal action only. Plaintiff has no objection to the same.

Consequently, the statements and undertakings given by learned counsel for defendant no. 1 are accepted by this Court and defendant no. 1 is held bound by the same.

Accordingly, present suit is decreed qua defendant no. 1 in accordance with the statements and undertakings given by learned counsel for defendant no. 1. Registry is directed to prepare a decree sheet accordingly.

Registry is also directed to issue to an authorised representative of the plaintiff a certificate authorizing him/her to receive back from the Collector full amount of the Court fee paid by it in the present suit.

With the aforesaid observations, present suit and pending application stand disposed of. The interim order dated 26th November, 2018 stands modified.

MANMOHAN, J FEBRUARY 19, 2019 rn