Allowed

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Reliant Chemicals

Bombay HC1 Dec 2016S/909/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a leave petition made absolute converting a notice of motion into a suit order. The court decreed the suit, ordered destruction of sealed packaging, discharged the Court Receiver, and made the Defendant withdraw a trademark application, all in terms of the Plaintiffs' prayer without costs.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed; trademark application withdrawn; packaging destroyed at Defendant's cost; Receiver discharged on payment of costs.

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Reliant Chemicals — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

904-NMSL-2804-2016.DOC

¶2

JSN

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION LEAVE PETITION NO. 287 OF 2016

¶4

WITH

¶5

NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO. 2804 OF 2016

¶6

IN

¶7

SUIT NO. 909 OF 2016

¶8

… Plaintiff

¶9

Hindustan Unilever Limited… Plaintiff
Versus
Reliant Chemicals… Defendant

¶10

Mr. Ashutosh Kane, with Mr. Nikhil Sharma, i/b W.S. Kane and
Company for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Gunjan Chaubey, for the Defendant.

¶11

Mr. M.R. Mandavgade, Officer on Special Duty to Court Receiver is
present.

¶12

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 1st December 2016

¶13

PC:-

¶14

1.Leave Petition No. 287 of 2016 is not on board. Mentioned.
Taken on board. For the reasons set out in the Petition, it is made
absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶15

2.Mr. Gunjan Chaubey, Proprietor of the Defendant, who is
personally present in Court, submits to a decree in terms of prayer

¶16

Page 1 of 2
1st December 2016

¶17

904-NMSL-2804-2016.DOC

¶18

clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) and (f) of the Suit. Mr. Kane, therefore, does
not press the prayer for damages.

¶19

3.The Suit is decreed in these terms with no order as to costs.
Drawn up decree is dispensed with. Refund of Court Fees, if any, in
accordance with the Rules.

¶20

4.The Court Receiver had sealed certain goods. The packaging
is to be destroyed after removing the goods. The Defendants will do
this destruction at their own cost within 12 weeks and file an
affidavit of compliance within 16 weeks. The goods may be reused.

¶21

5.The Court Receiver stands discharged without passing
accounts but on payment of his costs, charges and expenses within
four weeks from today by the Plaintiffs.

¶22

6.The Defendant agrees to withdraw his trade mark application
No. 03204728 in class 03 in respect of the mark RINKO or RINKO
PLUS.

¶23

7.Notice of Motion (L) No. 2804 of 2016 does not survive and
is disposed accordingly.

¶24

8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

¶25

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶26

Page 2 of 2
1st December 2016

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Reliant Chemicals

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. v. Reliant Chemicals

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sureshchandra Ohanlal Vora Vs S.M.Vora.

Mr. Suraj Tekchand Nanda Vs Ashoo a. Talwar and Anr.

Sudha Chand Widow of Krishan Chand Vs Krishan Chand Deceased

Rksv Securities India Private Limited Vs Sunlight Broking LLP

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Reliant Chemicals

Noel Edward Almeida Vs Xavier Paul Almeida (Deceased)