Aktiebolaget Volvo & ORS. v. Bharat Lock House Pvt. Ltd. & ORS.

#9 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 197/2017 & I.As. 3254/2017, 3255/2017 AKTIEBOLAGET VOLVO & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Praveen Anand with Mr. Raunaq Kamath, Advocates versus BHARAT LOCK HOUSE PVT. LTD. & ORS.

..... Defendants Through Mr. Ajay Sahni with Mr Rachit Shrivastav, Advocate.

D-2 and D-3 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 26.07.2017 At the outset, Mr. Praveen Anand, learned counsel for the plaintiffs states that he does not wish to press the suit against the defendant no. 4. Accordingly, defendant no. 4 is deleted from the array of parties. Let an amended memo of parties be filed during the course of the day. It is pertinent to mention that present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining passing off, infringement of trademark VOLVO along with damages and delivery up.

Mr. Praveen Anand states that this Court in several matters has granted injunctions in plaintiffs' favour for a diverse range of goods. The list of ex-parte ad interim injunctions granted in plaintiffs' favour are reproduced hereinbelow:-

Mr. Ajay Sahni, learned counsel for the defendants states that defendant no. 1 has been struck off from the records under Section 563 of the old Companies Act, 1956.

He further states that the defendant nos. 2 and 3, who are personally present in Court, have no objection if the present suit is decreed in accordance with the paragraph 23(a) and (b) of the plaint. Keeping in view the aforesaid statement, learned counsel for the plaintiffs gives up the relief for damages, cost and delivery up. Accordingly, present suit is decreed in accordance with the paragraph 23(a) and (b) of the plaint. Registry is directed to prepare the decree sheet. MANMOHAN, J JULY 26, 2017 rn