Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Hle Glascoat Limited vs Sachin Industries Limited on 24 November, 2025

Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                          $~44
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CS(COMM) 1054/2024
                                    HLE GLASCOAT LIMITED                          .....Plaintiff
                                                 Through: Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Sr. Advocate with
                                                          Mr. Harsh Trivedi, Mr. Nilesh Nayak
                                                          and    Mr.    Shantanu       Parashar,
                                                          Advocates

                                                                  versus

                                    SACHIN INDUSTRIES LIMITED                .....Defendant
                                                 Through: Ms. Rajeshwari H. And Mr. Tahir
                                                           A.J., Advocates

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                            ORDER

% 24.11.2025 O.A. 200/2025 (Chamber appeal against order dated 06.11.2025)

1. This is a chamber appeal filed under Rule 5, Chapter II of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the order dated 06.11.2025.

2. The Ld. Joint Registrar (J), by this order, has directed the defendant to answer ten [10] interrogatories.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/defendant states that information sought at interrogatories no. 5 and 13 pertains to the details of the personnel of the defendant, and the defendant would not like to disclose this information at this stage lest it prejudices its evidence. She states that disclosing the name of the defendant's personnel may prejudice the defendant and compromise its evidence.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/11/2025 at 21:03:38

4. She states that in addition to objecting to answering the interrogatories at serial nos. 5 and 13, the defendant is also aggrieved by the conclusion and/or inference drawn by the Ld. Joint Registrar (J) at paragraph '9' while allowing this application. She states that this inference is not made out and not sustainable in law. The relevant portion of paragraph '9' reads as under:-

"9. Plaintiff Counsel is correct in arguing that if the defendant's assertion of public disclosure by the plaintiff of its proprietary information is to be considered, defendant's silence in not opposing the plaintiff's patent application 4 years later to the alleged date of brochure being made public, is a strong contradiction which significantly dents the defendant's assertion........"

5. Issue notice.

6. Mr. Harsh Trivedi, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, accepts notice. Mr. J. Sai Deepak, learned senior counsel has also addressed submissions.

7. This Court has heard the parties.

8. Defendant is directed to answer the interrogatories at serial nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 14 within the time granted by the Ld. Joint Registrar (J). With respect to interrogatories at serial no. 5 and serial no. 13, the defendant is directed to file its answer to the said interrogatories in a sealed cover, and this sealed cover will be opened only after the defendant files evidence of its witnesses.

9. The respondent/plaintiff has no objection to the aforesaid directions.

10. This Court finds merit in the submission of the defendant vis-a--vis the challenge to the inference at paragraph '9' of the order. It is clarified that the inference drawn by the Ld. Joint Registrar (J) at paragraph '9' [as extracted above] is hereby set aside, and to that extent, the appeal is allowed.

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/11/2025 at 21:03:38

11. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

CS(COMM) 1054/2024

12. Old Vakalatnama dated 20.11.2024 by Mr. B. Shravanth Shanker, Advocate on behalf of the plaintiff is discharged, and the new Vakalatnama dated 04.11.2025 filed by Mr. Harsh Trivedi, Advocate is taken on record.

13. List the matter before the Court on the date already fixed, i.e., 08.12.2025.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 24, 2025/rhc/aa CS(COMM) 1054/2024 Page 3 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/11/2025 at 21:03:38