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

2000 Supreme(Del) 1125

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
Preeti Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra Prahladkar – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rajiv Talwar and Sanjay Sarin

JUDGMENT :

Vikramajit Sen, J.

S. No. 2316/2000

1. Let the plaint be registered.

2. Issue summons to Defendants both by ordinary process as well as registered A.D. post, on plaintiff's filing process fee and registered A.D. covers, returnable by 19th February, 2001.

I.A. No. 10871/2000

3. Notice for the date fixed.

4. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs has drawn my attention to the fact that the design of the picture photo frames of the plaintiff has been duly registered. The certificates of these photo frames are available on page Nos. 1 to 49 of the documents. Learned counsel further draws attention to the photographs on page No. 60 which photographs, he states that, were taken with great difficulty because of the obstruction by the Defendants. It is submitted that the photo frames shown on these pages are clear copies/imitation of the plaintiffs registered designs. It is further stated that Defendant No. 2 was an employee of the plaintiff and in support of this contention learned counsel has relied on the photograph contained on page No. 58 and the salary slip on page 62. It is alleged that these offending photo frames were on exhibition by the Defendants at the Indian Handicrafts and G

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