Allowed

Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. v. Mobimedia International Pte. Ltd. and Anr. and Idea Cellular Ltd. and Anr.(Respondents)

Bombay HC10 Feb 2020CHOL/446/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a commercial interim application for summary judgment. The court directed personal service of the application on defendants whose original counsel applied for discharge, setting a response deadline and conditions for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Served the interim application personally on the Defendants with two months to reply and apply for hearing; discharged Malvi Ranchoddas & Co. as advocates for one respondent.

Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

comip 659-2017.doc

¶2

sat

¶3

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

¶4

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 659 OF 2017

¶5

WITH

¶6

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2020

¶7

WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 957 OF 2018

¶8

WITH

¶9

CHAMBER ORDER NO. 383 OF 2019 (NOT ON BOARD)
AND

¶10

CHAMBER ORDER NO. 446 OF 2019 (NOT ON BOARD)

¶11

Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt.Ltd....Plaintiff

¶12

vs.

¶13

Mobimedia International Pte.Ltd. & Anr....Defendants

¶14

Mr.Amit Jamsandekar with Vighnesh Kamat, Vinita Muley, Aishwaryajeeta
Tawde and Swananand Tarde i/b.VVJ Law Partners for Applicant/Plaintiff
in IA 1/2020 and NMCD 957/2018.

¶15

Mr.Jarin Mukesh Doshi i/b. Malvi Ranchoddas & Co for Defendants &
Respondent No.2 in NMCD 957/2018.

¶16

Mr.Jehangir Jejeebhoy with Sneha Jaisingh and Pratik Singhvi i/b.
Bharucha & Partners for Respondent No.1 in NMCD 957/2018.

¶17

Mr.Ketan Gupta i/b. Legaleye Associates for Respondent No.4 in disposed
of NMCD 2151/2019.

¶18

CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.

¶19

DATE : 10 FEBRUARY 2020

¶20

P.C. :

¶21

This commercial interim application is moved by the
Applicant/Plaintiff for summary judgment. Considering the fact that the
Advocates of the original Defendants (Defendant Nos.1 and 2) do not claim
to represent the Defendants any longer and have applied for discharge, let
this interim application be served personally on the Defendants. The
Defendants are directed to file a reply to the interim application within a

1 / 2

comip 659-2017.doc

sat

month of being served the interim application. After the interim application
is served on the Defendants, the Applicant/Plaintiff may apply for
circulating the application for hearing before this court.

¶26

2In the meantime, the original Advocates appearing for
Defendant Nos.1 and 2 herein as well as Respondent No.4 to the notice of
motion (Mobimedia India Pvt. Ltd.) have taken out two separate
applications for discharge, being Chamber Order No.383 of 2019 and
Chamber Order No.446 of 2019. Chamber Order No.383 of 2019 is
seeking discharge as Advocates of Defendant Nos.1 and 2, whereas
Chamber Order No.446 of 2019 seeks discharge as Advocates of
Respondent No.4 to the notice of motion (Mobimedia India Pvt. Ltd.).
Considering the controversy and in particular, the observations made by
this court in its order dated 3 May 2019, the application for discharge
under Chamber Order No.383 of 2019 is deferred. Considering, however,
that a new advocate has already entered his appearance for Respondent
No.4 to the notice of motion, Chamber Order No.446 of 2019 is allowed
and M/s.Malvi Ranchoddas and Company are discharged as Advocates of
Respondent No.4 (Mobimedia India Pvt. Ltd.).

¶27

2 / 2

Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. v. Mobimedia International Pte. Ltd. and Anr. and Idea Cellular Ltd. and Anr.(Respondents)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. v. Mobimedia International Pte. Ltd. and Anr. and Idea Cellular Ltd. and Anr.(Respondents)

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

Official Liquidator Vs Kanakdhara Stell Ltd.

Official Liquidator Vs M/S. Suvikas Alloys and Steel Pvt. Ltd.

Official Liquidator Vs Sunearth Ceramics Ltd.

Sugundha Anand Shelar and 3 Ors. Vs the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee

The Indian Express (P) Ltd. and 2 Others Vs Prashant Goenka and 11 Others

The Chief Gen. Mgr. (Hr) Mah. State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Panchappa Dattatraya Takkalgi