← Library
High Court of DelhiCONT.CAS(C)/278/2020

M/S Gold Medal Electricals Pvt Ltd v. Shri Ramlal Rajpurohit Trading As Mak Gold Cable Industries

2020-06-05Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva3 pages

$~5 & 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 278/2020 & CM APPL.11844/2020 M/S. GOLD MEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.K.Bansal with Mr.Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocates.

versus SHRI RAMLAL RAJPUROHIT TRADING AS MAK GOLD CABLE INDUSTRIES ..... Respondent Through:

None.

+ CONT.CAS(C) 279/2020 M/S. GOLD MEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT LTD ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.K.Bansal with Mr.Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocates.

versus SHRI RAMLAL RAJPUROHIT TRADING AS MAK GOLD CABLE INDUSTRIES ..... Respondent Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

O R D E R

% 05.06.2020 CM 11893/2020 (Exemption) in CONT.CAS(C) 279/2020 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CONT.CAS(C) 278/2020 & CONT.CAS(C) 279/2020 1.

The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner had filed only one petition, however, as an office objection was raised it was refilled after removing the objection. He submits that the Registry by mistake has listed both the petitions, the one filed prior to scrutiny by the Registry and second after an office objection was raised. He submits that the later filed petition be treated as the correct petition.

3.

Accordingly, in view of the above, the Contempt Petition (C) No.278/2020 which has been listed subject to office objection is directed to be deleted and deregistered. The proceedings shall continue on Contempt Petition (C) No.279/2020. 4.

None appears for the respondent despite intimation having been sent.

5.

During the proceedings the Court Master was asked to contact the respondent over phone. Respondent has stated that he is not in a position to connect as he is not familiar with computers. 6.

Accordingly, issue notice to the respondent returnable on 18.06.2020.

7.

Over the phone respondent has informed the Court Master that he has no concern with the mark and he has not assigned the mark to anybody. Let the respondent specifically state on affidavit as to whether he has assigned the mark by the Deed of Assignment dated 01.09.2005 or not.

8.

Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsel for the petitioner through email and the respondent through WhatsApp.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JUNE 05, 2020/rk