Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
GAUTAM SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
RAVI RAI & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for impleadment involving defendants discussing their non-engagement with trademark. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. affidavit submission by defendants allowing closure of applications based on prior conduct. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. application disposition reserved for future proceedings against a specific defendant. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
O R D E R
% 26.08.2025 I.A. 15434/2025
1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment of four new persons as defendant nos. 5, 6, 7 and
8.
2. For ease of reference proposed defendant nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 are referred to as defendant nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 in the order.
Defendant no. 5 and Defendant no. 7
3. Defendant no. 5 appears in person and has joined the proceedings through video conferencing link.
Page 1 of 3
4. He submits that he had a restaurant operating under the impugned mark, which he had closed down in past 1½ year. He submits that he has also deleted his listing on Zomato two weeks ago. He therefore prays that he may not be impleaded in these proceedings.
5. Learned counsel for defendant no. 7 states that Swiggy has already taken down defendant no. 7’s listing and defendant no. 7 d
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
