G.JAYACHANDRAN
ITC Limited, Rep. by its Constituted Attorney, P. Ramkumar, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt Ltd, Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer in O.A.No.554 of 2021 : Judge's Summons filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules read with Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of C.P.C.,
(a). This application should not be treated as urgent?
(b). This Hon'ble Court should not pleased to grant an interim injunction restraining the respondent, their management, members, affiliates, directors, servants, officers, employees, representatives, agents and all other persons claiming under them or acting in concert with them or on their behalf or acting on their instructions from telecasting, broadcasting, publishing, disseminating or otherwise communicating to the public in any manner, any advertisement or any part thereof or any other advertisements of a similar nature in any language or any other representation or in any other manner or part thereof or any other advertisement of a similar nature to be telecast or broadcast or communicated to the public or published in any manner which directly or indirectly or in any manner, disparages and/or denigrates the applicant's NIMYLE brand and/or goods bearing the NIMYLE trademark in any manner whatsoever, pending disposal of the suit.
(c). Such further or other
Hamdard Dawakhana (Walf) Lal Kuan -vs- Union of India reported in AIR 1960 SC 554
Tata Press Limited -vs- Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited and others reported in 1995 (5) SCC 139
Bennett Coleman -vs- Union of India reported in 1972 (2) SCC 788
Lakhanpal National Limited -vs- MRTP Commission and another reported in 1989 (3) SCC 251
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.