Valmiki J. Mehta, J.

1. The facts of the aforesaid cases are more or less similar. Reference is therefore being made to the facts of the OMP No. 614/2007.

2. The petitioner in this case by means of this OMP under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in effect prays for the following reliefs, though the reliefs in the prayer clauses of the petition are differently worded:-

(i) Seeking a restraint against the respondent from using the control room/head-end and the network operations/assets/ equipment of the petitioners.

(ii) Restraining the respondent from running cable networking business either in his name or any other name;

(iii) Restraining the respondent from interfering with the entire cable network business including rights over cable operators/franchisees and subscriber base/connectivity of the petitioners.

(iv) Appointment of a Commissioner to make inventories and take over the assets of the petitioners with the respondent (which reliefs have more or less been granted).

(v) Restraining the respondent from using the trademark/logos of the petitioners namely "Siti Cable", "Channel Siti", "Siti Music", "Siti Hulchul" or any other mark/logos connected or linked with the petitioner No. 1.

Other incidental orders with respect to the aforesaid reliefs have also been asked for.

3. This court when this case came up for admission on 6.11.2007, passed the following order:-

"Issue notice, returnable on 12.02.2008.

The learned counsel for the plaintiff has drawn my attention to the agreement in question and has also indicated that in similar circumstances in respect of other parties where the same cause of action had arisen, this court had passed ad interim ex parte orders. That matter was OMP327/2004 and the order passed thereon was dated 21.09.2004.

Considering all these circumstances, I direct that till the next date of hearing, the respondent is restrained from using the logos "Siti Cable" and "Siti Channels" owned by the petitioner No. 1 and/or from creating any third party interest in the movable assets owned by the petitioners and which are listed in documents 12, 13,14 and Annexure A to the Agreement.

I also appoint Mr. Tejinder Singh, Advocate (R/o A-162, Gujranwala Town, Part-1, Delhi 110033 Tel: 27141005 Mobile-9810526009) as a receiver to take possession of the equipments detailed in document Nos 12,13,14 and Annexure A to the said agreement dated 01.05.2004. The receiver shall prepare an inventory of all the movables. Thereafter, the movables shall be stored in a place to be provided by the petitioners. The above named receiver shall proceed to the address noted in prayer b (i) for the aforesaid purpose. Insofar as the address given at b (ii) of the prayer clause i.e., C-202, Sahajanand Complex, 2nd Floor, Opp Swaminarayan Mandir, Shahi Baug, Ahmedabad-380004, Mr. Navin Chawla, Advocate (Mobile: 981011498) is appointed as a receiver to take the possession of the assets indicated above which may be lying in these premises. After preparing an inventory, he shall store the same in the place to be provided by the petitioners. The respondent is also restrained from collecting any subscription on behalf of the petitioner Nos 1 and 2 and shall not interfere with the subscriber base and connectivity of the petitioners. The said receivers shall be paid a sum of Rs. 30,000/- each as fees.

Dasti.

IA No. 12739/2007

Allowed subject to all just exceptions."

4. The counsel for the respondent has not disputed the directions passed by the order dated 6.11.2007, except the portion ".....shall not interfere with the subscriber base and connectivity of the petitioners". The counsel for the respondent states that the respondent is not interested in any of the assets or the decoders or the trade marks/logos or connectivity of the petitioners and undertakes not to use them. Though, most of the assets according to the counsel for the respondent have been handed over pursuant to the orders of this Court, however, assuming that there are any o