Appeal against an injunction order was dismissed operated by视频会议 due to non-appearance of appellant. The court found no infirmity in the injunction granted on the basis of prior user.
No order as to costs. The appeal and connected applications are dismissed.
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.
FMAT 673 of 2016 With CAN 1 of 2016 (old CAN 7080 of 2016)
Ct. 8
Jay Prakash Singh Versus M/s. Bajaj Games & Ors.
(Through Video Conference)
The appellant is not represented nor any accommodation is prayed for. Although the appeal was filed on 28th June, 2016, no attempt was made on behalf of the appellant to proceed with the matter.
We have perused the order under appeal. The order of injunction was granted on 6th April, 2016. The defendant was directed to file written statement by 30th May, 2016. The order of injunction was granted on the basis of the prior user. We do not find any infirmity of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
In view thereof, the appeal and the connected applications stand dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
Jay Prakash Singh
M/s. Bajaj Games & Ors.
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
Soumen Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
