Dismissed

sakar glazed tiles private limited v. h and r johnson (india) Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC6 Dec 2006APP/847/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal arose from an interlocutory order in a trademark infringement suit where parties agreed to settlement. Court decreed suit by consent between plaintiff and first defendant, dismissed it against others, and held appeal cannot survive such final disposition.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is disposed of as the underlying suit has been decreed by consent.

sakar glazed tiles private limited Vs h and r… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

 -: 1 :-

¶2

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

¶3

 APPEAL NO.847 OF 2006
 In
 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3401 OF 2006
 In

¶4

 SUIT NO.2835 OF 2006

¶5

 Sakar Glazed Tiles Private Limited : Appellant
 (Orig.Defendant no.1)
 V/s.

¶6

 H & R Johnson (India) Ltd. & Ors. : Respondents
 (No.1 Orig.Plaintiff,
 Nos.2 and 3 Orig.Defendant
 Nos.2 and 3)

¶7

 Mr.F.E. D’vitre, senior counsel, with Mr.Rahul Chitnis
 i/b. Ms K. Prabhu for the appellant.

¶8

 Dr.Virendra Tulzapurkar, senior counsel, with Mr.H.W.Kane
 and Mr.Rahul Kadam i/b. Mr.H.W.Kane for respondent no.1.

¶9

CORAM : R.M.LODHA & S.A.BOBDE,JJ.

¶10

 DATE : DECEMBER 6, 2006.

¶11

P.C.

¶12

 1. This appeal arises from an ad-interim order in the
 suit filed for infringement of the plaintiff’s registered
 trade mark.

¶13

 2. The plaintiff and the 1st defendant have agreed to
 settle their disputes raised in the suit in terms of the
 consent terms handed in, marked ‘X’ for identification
 purposes.

¶14

 3. We perused the consent terms and are of the view that
 these are in the interests of the plaintiff and the 1st

¶15

 -: 2 :-

¶16

 defendant.

¶17

 4. The senior counsel for the plaintiff (respondent no.1)
 submits that the plaintiff is not desirous of prosecuting
 its claim against the defendant nos.2 and 3.

¶18

 5. We, accordingly, order that the suit shall stand
 decreed of between the plaintiff and the defendant no.1
 in terms of the consent terms. The suit stands dismissed

¶19

 as against the defendant nos.2 and 3 as not pressed.

¶20

 6. In view of the decree having been passed in the suit
 in terms of the consent terms between the plaintiff and
 the defendant no.1, the appeal does not survive and stands
 disposed of accordingly.

¶21

 7. The plaintiff will be refunded the Court fee as per
 existing notification.

¶22

 8. Disposal of the suit renders Notice of Motion no.3401

¶23

 of 2006 infructuous.

¶24

 R.M. LODHA, J.

¶25

 S.A. BOBDE, J.

sakar glazed tiles private limited v. h and r johnson (india) Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

sakar glazed tiles private limited v. h and r johnson (india) Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajjan Mills Ltd. Vs Ramchandra Hetram Pupta and Anr.

Ripan Wadhwa and Anr. Vs M/S. Sun Pharmaceuitcal Industries Ltd.

M/S. Gms Technologies Ltd. Vs M/S. Plastika Enterprises

Sakar Glazed Tiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs H and R Johnson (India) Ltd. and Ors.

m/s prabhudas hirji and Co. and 3 Ors. Vs e-parte- atmaram leasing co.pvt Ltd.

oil and natural gas corporation Ltd. Vs project engineering and sole prop. of shri kirty dave