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

2003 Supreme(Del) 525

P.C.JAIN
J. KOHLI – Appellant
Versus
RAM BHAGWAT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANURADHA MUKHERJI, SANJAY JAIN, TRIDIP PAIS

R. C. JAIN

( 1 ) DEFENDANTS have moved IA No. 1263/2003 under Rule 3 Chapter VI of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1967 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for condonation of delay in filing the written statement while the plaintiffs have moved IA No. 565/2003 under Order VIII Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC praying for a judgment and decree in terms of the prayer set out in the suit on the failure of the defendants to file the written statement within the period as prescribed under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC.

( 2 ) IN brief, the facts are that the plaintiffs have filed a suit against the defendants for breach of contract, damages and permanent injunction from violating the registered copyright of plaintiff No. 1 and other intellectual property rights etc. The suit was ordered to be registered and summons of the suit and notice of the interlocutory application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 were ordered to be issued to the defendants on 28th May, 2002, returnable for 19th September, 2002. The proceedings were taken up before the Joint Registrar on 19th September, 2002 when the counsel represented the defendants and sought time for filing written st






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