SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Del) 1047

AUSTIN NICHOLS AND CO. – Appellant
Versus
ARVIND BEHL – Respondent


MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

( 1 ) BY this order, I propose to decide two interlocutory applications, I. A. No. 999 of 2005 and I. A. No. 1313 of 2005. Both these applications were very hotly contested, in fact much more than I had imagined when the hearing started! The applications were heard on 8th, 13th to 15th, 21st, 26th and 27th July, 2nd and 4th August when judgment was reserved.

( 2 ) I. A. No. 999 of 2005 is an application filed by the Plaintiffs seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from directly or indirectly dealing in alcoholic beverages or any other allied goods under the trade mark Blenders Pride , while I. A. No. 1313 of 2005 is an application filed by Defendant No. 2 under section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for staying trial of this suit since this Defendant had earlier instituted Suit No. 2105 of 2005 in the District court at Jalandhar, Punjab (for short the Jalandhar suit) against Seagram Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. which as per the averments made by the Plaintiffs in this Court, has merged with the Plaintiff No. 2. The identity of the contesting parties in both the suits is substantially the same. Defendant No. 2 has also alleged in its application tha




































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top