IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided On: 28.08.2017
Appellants: Aashiana
Rolling Mills Ltd.
Vs.
Respondent: Kamdhenu Ltd.
Judges/Coram:
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: C.M. Lall , Sr. Adv.,
Kapil Wadhwa and Devyani Nath ,
Advs.
For Respondents/Defendant: Akhil Sibal ,
Sr. Adv., S.K. Bansal , Ajay Amitabh Suman ,
Kapil Giri and Nikhil Chawla ,
Advs.
JUDGMENT
As ld. counsel for the
caveator has put in appearance, the caveat stands discharged.
FAO(OS) 237/2017 and CM
Nos. 30823-24/2017
1. The appellant is
aggrieved by the order dated 9th of August 2017 whereby hearing in an
application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure
filed by the respondent herein in CS(OS) No. 360/2017 has been postponed to
15th September, 2017.
2. The primary ground of
challenge of the appellant rests on the fact that an ex-parte order of
injunction dated 15th of June 2017 was passed against the appellant by the
trial court in the suit, which was then filed before the Additional District
Judge, Saket Courts, New Delhi. By this order, the appellant was inter alia
restrained from using, selling, soliciting, exporting, displaying advertising
or by any other mode dealing with the design relied upon by the respondent,
which was registered as No. 250968 in Class 25-01 in relation to steel bar and
related/allied products.
3. Mr. C.M. Lall, ld.
Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the goods i.e. TMT
rods, are perishable in nature and given the fact that there is a heavy
moisture in atmosphere on account of monsoon, the TMT rods which have been
manufactured by the appellant and have been lying ready for sale are rusting
which may result in depreciation of their market value and may render them
unusable. It is submitted that as a result, the appellant could suffer
commercial losses of over a crore of rupees.
4. We are of the view that
it would not be appropriate for this court to intervene in the matter at this
stage and that the appellant deserves to make a prayer for expedited hearing
before the ld. Single Judge, seized of the suit bearing CS(OS) No. 360/2017.
5. In view thereof, the
suit bearing CS(OS) No. 360/2017 be placed before the ld. Single Judge on 29th
August, 2017 for appropriate orders for expedited hearing on the application
for injunction of the respondent. Inasmuch as the respondent is represented
before us today and has been put to notice about the date fixed before the ld.
Single Judge, no special notice in this regard is necessary.
6. We are positive that the
ld. Single Judge would expedite hearing in the matter.
7. This appeal as well as
the applications are disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti under signatures of
the Court Master.
