Disposed

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. v. Arjun Rampal and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2019CHSCD/182/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a commercial IP suit, the court directed the plaintiff to provide inspection of original documents within two weeks and required defendants to admit or deny allegations within one week of inspection, after waiving service objections.

What did the court decide?

Directed plaintiff to give inspection of documents within two weeks and defendants to file admission/denial within one week of inspection.

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs Arjun Rampal and 3 Ors. — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

4.CHSCD-182-2018.doc

¶2

1/2

¶3

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

¶4

COMMERCIAL CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.182 OF 2018 WITH COMMERCIAL NOTICE OF MOTION NO.719 OF 2017 IN

¶5

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.795 OF 2017

¶6

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. ….Plaintiff Vs. Arjun Rampal and Ors. ….Defendants

¶7

Mr. Shyam Panchmukhi I/b. Mr. Aditya Pratap for plaintiff. Mr. Vivek Kantawala a/w. Mr. Sunny P. I/b. SSP Legal and Co. for defendant no.1/applicant in CHSCD/182/2018. Mr. Aakash Rebello I/b. SSP Legal for defendant nos.2 and 3.

¶8

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 15^th JULY 2019

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

COMMERCIAL CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.182 OF 2018

¶11

1 Plaintiff has relied upon certain documents of which inspection

¶12

is being sought by defendants. I see no prejudice if plaintiff is directed to give inspection of the documents relied upon in the plaint as well as in the notice of motion.

¶13

2 I am not for a moment saying that plaintiff is deliberately not giving inspection but the fact is it will be in plaintiff's interest if inspection is given so that the suit can proceed expeditiously.

¶14

3 In the circumstances, plaintiff is directed to give inspection within two weeks from today. Inspection shall be given of the original

Gauri Gaekwad

4.CHSCD-182-2018.doc

2/2

documents and if documents are not available, then plaintiff will state who has those documents. If inspection of photocopy is given, then plaintiff will explain why inspection of original documents cannot be given. Within one week of taking inspection, defendants shall also give their statement of admission and denial with reasons for denial.

¶19

4 Mr. Kantawala and Mr. Rebello state that writ of summons has not been served. The counsel for plaintiff is unable to answer because he states that he has not taken instructions and he has to check the records. I would have expected plaintiff to be ready with these answers. Mr. Kantawala and Mr. Rebello waive service of the writ of summons.

¶20

5 Written statement to be filed and copy served within 30 days of taking inspection of the documents from plaintiff.

¶21

6 Chamber summons accordingly stands disposed.

¶22

7 Suit to be listed for directions on 30th August 2019.

¶23

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶24

Gauri Gaekwad

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. v. Arjun Rampal and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. v. Arjun Rampal and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Magna Developers Vs Alf Developers and Ors.

Richi Anurag Saboo Vs Canara Bank and 6 Others

John Jerome Dabreo and 3 Ors. Vs the Secretatry, Azad Nagar Krupa Sagar Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Sajjid Amir Khan and 2 Ors. Vs Shree Developers

Vibha Dutta Khosla and 2 Ors. Vs Mohit Raina and 4 Ors.

Sucden India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Cane Agro Energy (India) Ltd.