Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi Vs Viking Media and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2025)

Home
Bombay HC
2025
Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi Vs Viking Media and EntertainmentMr. Jaaved Jaaferi v. Viking Media and Entertainment Pvt. Lt

Dismissed

Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi v. Viking Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Jmj Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.) and Anr.

Bombay HC13 Nov 2025CONP/16/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On 13th November 2025, the Bombay High Court, Commercial Division, dismissed Commercial IP Suit No. 149 of 2014 for want of prosecution. The plaintiff did not appear and failed to file a convenience compilation despite an order granting a last chance. Accordingly, the associated Contempt Petition No. 16 of 2014 was also disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; Contempt Petition disposed of.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution; Contempt Petition disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the plaintiff's non-compliance with earlier court orders and non-appearance. +1 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The suit was dismissed for want of prosecution as the plaintiff failed to appear and did not comply with a prior order granting one last chance to file a convenience compilation. The associated contempt petition was disposed of simultaneously.

A compact analysis

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.

A

1/2

10-COMIP-149-2014.DOC

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

IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 149 OF 2014

WITH

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.16 OF 2014

IN

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 149 OF 2014

Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi

...Plaintiff

Versus

Viking Media And Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.

(formerly Known As Jmj Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.) And Anr. ...Defendants

None for the Plaintiff.

Ms. Srishti Magdum i/b Parinam Law Associates, for the Defendants.

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 13th NOVEMBER 2025

P.C.

None for the Plaintiff.

The matter was placed on board 'for directions' today. When the matter was called, learned counsel for the Defendant pointed out that even on 22 nd July 2025, none has appeared, and hence the matter was stood over to 12 th August 2025 under the caption ‘for directions’.

Ms. Magdum, learned counsel for the Defendants then pointed out that by the order dated 12th August 2025, the Plaintiff were represented through counsel and were granted one last chance to file their convenience compilation.

She submits that the matter was then to be placed under the caption 'for dismissal’ in the event the convenience compilation was not filed before the next date.

Vaibhav

2/2

10-COMIP-149-2014.DOC

Ms. Magdum then points out that the Plaintiff has not complied with this order and is also not present today. Hence, it is clear that the Plaintiff is not desirous of prosecuting the suit. The suit is accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution.

The Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of.

[ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]

Vaibhav

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the plaintiff's non-compliance with earlier court orders and non-appearance.
2.
Whether the contempt petition should be disposed of following the dismissal of the main suit.

Coram

AI extract

ARIF S. DOCTOR

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Bombay HC
Decided on: 13 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 14 Feb 2014
Case no.: CONP/16/2014
CNR: HCBM020010312014
Topic: Civil Procedure and Limitation
Bench: Arif S. Doctor
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Arif S. Doctor

AIC246 Ag and Co. Kg vs the Patent Office of India through Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks
12 Nov 2025
The Indian Performing Rights Society Limited vs Alcon Resort Holdings Limited
12 Nov 2025
Avon Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs Parle Products Industries Pvt. Ltd.
12 Nov 2025
Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi Vs Viking Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Jmj Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.) and Anr.
13 Nov 2025
Tata Motors Finance Limited vs Rahul Roadlines
13 Nov 2025
Manmandir Suraksha Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. and Anr. vs Saidham Loyola Co-Operative Housing Soc.Ltd and 28 Ors.
13 Nov 2025

Cite this judgement

Mr. Jaaved Jaaferi v. Viking Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known as Jmj Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.) and Anr., CONP/16/2014 (BOM), decided on 13 November 2025.

The Bombay High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

ARIF S. DOCTOR

Parties & counsel