Bennett Coleman & Company Limited v. Annapurna Broadcasting Private Limited & ORS
V $-18 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAQ (OS) (COMM) 150/2017, CAV No. 678/2017 & CM APPL. Nos. 26320/2017 & 26321/2017 BENNETT COLEMAN & COMPANY LIMITED Appellant Through:
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr.
Advocate with Mr. Kumal Tandon, Ms. Nidhi Jain, Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Mr. Kapil Rustagi, Mr. D K Srivastava & Mr. B Vivekananda, Advocates versus ANNAPURNA BROADCASTING PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.
.... Respondent Through:
Mr. Kirti Uppal, Advocate with Mr.
Nadeem Khan, Mr. Misbah Bin Tariq, Mr. Amanullah & Mr. Saqib Husain, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
ORDER
% 28.07.2017 The appellant is aggrieved by the acceptance (by the learned Single Judge) of the concession, without prejudice of the respondent/defendants that they would not use the expression "TIMES" in their logo and instead will use "TIMEZ". It is urged by the learned senior counsel that there are several grounds on which such arrangement as an ad hoc interim measure, should not have been accepted by the Court, that the learned FAO (OS) (COMM) 150/2017 By:AMULYA
Single Judge should have considered the petitioner/appellant's reservations/objections on this point and decided the application on its merits.
This Court is of the opinion that the appellant, in the first instance, should move the learned Single Judge for advancing the case for a date earlier than 15.09.2017 and also urge why the impugned order, is not feasible.
In case, such appellant so applies, learned Single Judge is requested to consider the application on merits, after hearing the parties at his earliest convenience and decide it according to law. At this stage, learned counsel for the defendant/respondent submits that the concession made with respect to the use of the word logo "TIMEZ" would be withdrawn.
It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.
In the light of the aforesaid observations, counsel for the appellant seeks libeity to withdraw the appeal which is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
Dasti under signatures of Court Master.
(wwjWiW'
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J S.PrGARG, J JULY 28, 2017/P FAO (OS) (COMM) 150/2017