JUDGEMENT

JYOTI SINGH, J.

I.A. 1882/2020 (Under Order XI Rule 7(c) CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 CPC, by Defendant)

1. Present application has been preferred on behalf of the Defendant under Order XI Rule 7(c) CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) read with Section 151 CPC, seeking permission to bring additional documents on record and lead evidence with respect to these documents.

2. Plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and all others acting on its behalf using any trademark that is identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademark ‘PEHLA NASHA’ either as a radio channel titled ‘RADIO NASHA’, trademark, trading style, name, logo, part of name or in any other manner or any other mark or name or domain name, identical to or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s mark ‘PEHLA NASHA’ in relation to any services/products especially for broadcast, re-broadcast, radio broadcast, internet broadcast and in any other form whatsoever, so as to result in violation of Plaintiff’s statutory and common law rights, along with other reliefs of damages etc.

3. It is pertinent to note, at the outset, that issues were framed in the present suit on 12.11.2018. Subsequently, Defendant filed its list of witnesses on 08.01.2019 and Plaintiff filed its list of witnesses on 16.01.2019. Plaintiff’s evidence concluded on 12.12.2019. Defendant filed its evidence by way of affidavit of DW-1, Mr. Neeraj Saraswat, on 25.01.2020 along with additional documents, which are now sought to be brought on record by way of the present application. The suit is currently at the stage of Defendant’s evidence.

4. The additional documents that the Defendant seeks to place on record by the present application are as follow:-

(i) A Copy of Power of Attorney dated 24.01.2020 of Mr. Neeraj Saraswat.

(ii) A Copy of Board Resolution dated 15.07.2015.

(iii) A Copy of the Brand Report dated 22.12.2015 prepared by the Brand Marketing and Management Company engaged by the Defendant.

(iv) A Chart detailing the filing status of Plaintiff’s and Defendant's Trademark Applications.

(v) Print outs of Defendant’s Radio Nasha Delhi's page on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

(vi) Copy of the Annual Financial Reports of the Defendant Company.

5. It must be noted at the outset that during the course of the arguments, Plaintiff had fairly and candidly tendered its no-objection with respect to document No. (i), i.e., copy of Power of Attorney dated 24.01.2020, document No. (ii), i.e., copy of Board Resolution dated 15.07.2015 and document No. (iv), i.e., charts detailing the filing status of Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s trademark applications. This stand is also reflected in the written note of arguments filed in support of the arguments canvassed in Court. In view of the aforesaid, these documents are taken on record.

6. Defendant seeks permission to take the additional documents on record on the grounds: (a) save and except two documents, remaining documents have emerged subsequent to the filing of the written statement by the Defendant; (b) the documents in no manner prejudice the right of the Plaintiff; (c) it is trite law that parties can be permitted to file additional evidence at any stage of the trial, including the appellate stage, if the document is required to adjudicate the disputes between the parties effectively and is relevant for substantial justice; (d) in the absence of the aforesaid documents, the lis between the parties cannot be decided completely, as the Plaintiff’s suit is based on the premise that Defendant is riding upon its goodwill and the additional documents would prove not only that Plaintiff has no goodwill for its alleged mark ‘PEHLA NASHA’ but also that it is not using the same as a trademark; (e) documents would demonstrate that there is