Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

    Reckitt & Colman Of India Ltd v. M.P.Ramchandran & Anr

    Date : 22nd June, 2010.

    The Court:- Mr. Partha Basu learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the plaintiff submits that in view of the earlier interim order of injunction the defendant, M. R. Ramchandran has since not used the trademark in question and as such is not using the trademark in any advertisements which are the subject matter of the suit.

    In view of such stand of the defendants, the plaintiff is not willing to proceed with the suit, as there is no necessity to proceed against the defendants at this stage as the defendants are admittedly not using the trademark in question in view of the earlier interim order.

    The suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. There will be no order as to costs.

    However, accepting the prayer of Mr. Basu, the plaintiff, needless to mention, will be entitled to initiate proceedings including suit, if in future any cause of action arises for such proceedings in favour of the plaintiff.

    All parties concerned are to act on a xerox signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.

    (MAHARAJ SINHA, J.) nm A.R.(C.R.)

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Reckitt & Colman Of India Ltd v. M.P.Ramchandran & Anr
    (Jun 22, 2010)