RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
KENT RO SYSTEMS LTD – Appellant
Versus
AMIT KOTAK – Respondent
1. Though the report of service is awaited but the counsel for the plaintiffs has filed affidavit of service of both the defendants.
2. One gentleman disclosing himself to be Mr. Amit Shabhulal Kotak appears and the counsel for the plaintiffs states that she identifies him as defendant No.1. The said Mr. Amit Shabhulal Kotak has also handed over his Driving Licence and a self attested photocopy of the same be kept by the Court Master on the file.
3. The defendant No.1 states that he has no objection to the suit, insofar as for the relief of permanent injunction, being decreed against him subject to the plaintiffs giving up their claim for damages and accounts.
4. The counsel for the plaintiffs is agreeable thereto.
5. I have ensured by speaking to Mr. Amit Shabhulal Kotak in vernacular language that he understands the consequences.
6. Accordingly, a decree is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant No.1 in terms of prayer paragraph 51(a), (b) & (c) of the plaint, leaving the plaintiffs and the defendant No.1 to bear their own costs.
7. Decree sheet be drawn up.
8. The counsel for the defendant No.2 eBay India Private Limited (eBay) also appears. The defendant
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.