Allowed

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. v. M/s.Ammu Ice Cream

Madras HC20 Jun 2024A/2620/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the plaintiff's application for appointing an Advocate Commissioner to inspect premises, seize infringing goods and documents, and file a report, directing parties to cooperate and fix remuneration.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Advocate Commissioner to inspect, seize infringing articles/documents and file report; remuneration fixed at Rs. 2,50,000/-; parties directed to cooperate.

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. Vs M/s.Ammu Ice Cream — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶2

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶3

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

¶4

This application is filed by the plaintiff to appoint an Advocate

¶5

Commissioner with directions to go to the premise of the respondent/defendant or other places where the respondent/defendant is storing the stocks, labels and other infringing articles, to take the inventory

¶6

of the infringing goods with the offending trade mark, documents and

¶7

other records related to the use of offending trade mark, seize those infringing products with the offending trademark, documents and other records related to the use of offending trade mark and deposit them before

¶8

this Court.

¶9

Since there was no representation for the defendant despite

¶10

service of suit summons, the sole defendant is set ex-parte today

¶11

(20.06.2024) vide separate order in the suit. The respondent herein is also

¶12

called absent. The averments made in the affidavit are not challenged.

¶13

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶15

A perusal of the affidavit and the records show that it is just and

¶16

necessary for appointment of Advocate Commissioner.

¶17

Accordingly, Mr.M.Ganeshkamu (Ms.No.3258/2016), Mobile

¶18

No.8870328020 having office at No.4/7, 4th Floor, Errabalu Chetty

¶19

Street, Opposite to Punjab National Bank, Chennai-600 001, is

¶20

appointed as Advocate Commissioner on the following directions:

¶21

(a) The learned Advocate Commissioner is directed

¶22

to issue notice to both the parties and fix a “date” of his/her inspection.

¶23

(b) Both the parties are directed to extend their fullest co-operation to the learned Advocate Commissioner.

¶24

(c) The remuneration for the learned Advocate Commissioner is fixed at Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty Thousand Only), which is to be paid by the applicant/plaintiff.

¶25

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶27

(d) The learned Advocate Commissioner is directed to inspect the premise of the respondent/defendant or other places where the defendant is storing the stocks, labels and other infringing articles, take inventory of the infringing goods with the offending trade mark, documents and other records related to the use of offending trade mark, seize the same and execute the warrant after getting memo of instructions from the applicant/plaintiff, on or before 03.07.2024 and file a report before this Court, on or before 05.07.2024.

¶28

With the above directions, this application is allowed.

¶29

6. List the matter on 09.07.2024 "for filing report by the learned

¶30

Advocate Commissioner".

¶31

20.06.2024

¶32

Ksa-2 Note: Issue order copy on 24.06.2024.

¶33

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶35

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

¶36

ksa-2

¶37

A.No.2620 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.97 of 2024

¶38

20.06.2024 (2/2)

¶39

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. v. M/s.Ammu Ice Cream

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. v. M/s.Ammu Ice Cream

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

M/S D.R.Raanka Bros., Vs Sri Sumangali Nagai Maaligai

Lyca Productions Private Limited Vs Vishal Krishna

Chakri Chigurupati Vs Spm Arts LLP and 5 others

Ravr Industries Private Limited Vs Brothers Enterprises

Salon Manthra Vs Max Hair Clinic Pvt. Ltd.

Salon Manthra Vs Max Hair Clinic Pvt. Ltd.