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

1991 Supreme(Sikk) 3

RIPUSUDAN DAYAL
ITC LTD. – Appellant
Versus
PHURBA LAMA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.UPADHYAYA, DIPAK DHINGRA, J.K.MITRA, SHANKAR GOPAL PAGIRE

R. DAYAL, J.


( 1 ) BY this revision-petition, the petitioner, I. T. C. Ltd, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, has challenged the order dated 27-5-1991 of Shri T. Dorjee, the learned District Judge, Sikkim, rejecting the petitioner's application in Civil Suit No. 2 of 1991, under O. VII, R. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for rejecting the plaint on the grounds that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and the suit is barred by law.

( 2 ) SUIT No. 2 of 1991 from which this revision has arisen was filed by respondents Nos. 1 to 4 on 7-3-1991. Respondent No. 5, Druk investment Company, Private Ltd. , is the first defendant and the petitioner-company (hereinafter referred as ITC) is the second defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs have claimed the following substantive reliefs :-"a) A declaration that the defendants are not entitled to use the said marks on any such cigarette or on the cigarette packets, whatsoever by themselves or by their dealers or servants, or agents. B) A perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, dealers, associates, or assigns from manufacturing, and/or marketing, and/or advertising and/or deal









































































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