Notice of Motion in a suit for design infringement and passing off dismissed for non-prosecution as Plaintiffs were absent and no ad-interim order was sought.
Notice of Motion dismissed for non-prosecution; no order as to costs.
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.
263-NMS-1518-16.DOC
ATUL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1518 OF 2016
IN
SUIT NO. 291 OF 2016
Bharat Cottage Industries…Plaintiffs
Versus
Ratan Polyplast…Defendant
None for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Himanshu Kane, with Mr. Rahul M. Kadam, i/b W. S. Kane &
Co., for the Defendant.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 19th September 2016
PC:-
1.The Plaintiffs and their Advocates are absent. Mr. Kane
tenders two further Affidavits dated 29th February 2016 and 14th
March 2016. These have been served on the Advocates for the
Plaintiffs. This is a Suit for infringement of design and passing off.
There is no ad-interim order. Further, I find from the Affidavits in
Reply that the Plaintiffs’ registration are under challenge.
2.The appearance of the Plaintiffs and their Advocates are
correctly shown on the daily board. None appears.
Page 1 of 2
19th September 2016
263-NMS-1518-16.DOC
3. The Notice of Motion is dismissed for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
Page 2 of 2
19th September 2016
Bharat Cottage Industries
Ratan Polyplast
G.S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court