Single judge allowed an infringement suit against Allure after they removed the infringing mark, decreeing prayer clauses (a), (b), and (c). Notice of Motion dismissed.
Suit decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c). Notice of Motion disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
919-S138-16+.DOC
ATUL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 138 OF 2016
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 526 OF 2016
AND
LEAVE PETITION NO. 266 OF 2015
Jawed Habib Hair & Beauty Limited
Versus
Allure & 5 Others
…Plaintiffs
…Defendants
Ms. Pritam D. Joshi, for the Plaintiffs.
Mr. Prem Sood, for Defendant Nos. 1 to 6.
CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:21st September 2016
PC:-
1. For the reasons set out in the Leave Petition, it is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
2. Mr. Sood states that the Defendants have removed the offending mark and ceased the infringing use of offending mark.
Page 1 of 2
21st September 2016
919-S138-16+.DOC
3. In view of this statement, the Suit is decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the Suit. There will be no order as to costs.
4. Drawn up decree dispensed with.
5.This order is without prejudice to the Defendants’ claim
against the Plaintiffs for recovery of the amounts allegedly due for
rental premises.
6.In view of this, nothing survives in the Notice of Motion and
the same is disposed accordingly.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
Page 2 of 2
21st September 2016
Jawed Habib Hair & Beauty Limited
Allure & 5 Others
G.S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court