Press Trust Of India Ltd v. Press Trust Of India Workers & ORS

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO 386/2017 PRESS TRUST OF INDIA LTD ..... Appellant Through:

Mr. Ashwini Mata, Sr. Adv. with Mr.

Bharat Chugh and Mr.

Kushank Sindhu, Advocates.

versus PRESS TRUST OF INDIA WORKERS & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. R.R.Kumar and Ms. Vidushi Garg, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R

% 10.10.2017 Caveat No. 871/2017 Counsel appears for the caveator.

Caveat accordingly stands discharged.

FAO 386/2017 & CM Nos. 36338-39/2017 1.

After arguments, this appeal as also the suit will stand disposed of because the counsel for the respondents/defendants states that the apprehension of the plaintiff as stated in the suit and as decided by the impugned order dated 16.9.2017 dismissing the injunction application under Order Rules and CPC is misconceived because the respondents/defendants neither have any intention to in any manner commit

an illegality of preventing any ingress and egress of the staff, employees, officials of the appellant/plaintiff qua the premises situated at 4, Parliament Street, New Delhi. Counsel for the respondents/defendants also states that the aforesaid statement will apply mutatis mutandis with respect to any customers or visitors of the appellant/plaintiff, but again with the caveat that the respondents/defendants have never in the past nor in the future intend to do so.

2.

It is also agreed that it is not disputed by either of the parties that the respondents/defendants do have a right to demonstration, however that demonstration has to be in accordance with law and such demonstration cannot in any manner hamper or prejudice the normal conduct of business of the appellant/plaintiff or the ingress or egress of any persons as stated above and that demonstration if is done will be done after giving due notice to the appellant/plaintiff and demonstration would be done at a distance which will not in any manner cause any prejudice or illegality as against the appellant/plaintiff's conduct of business including ingress and egress of his persons as stated above.

The impugned order dated 16.9.2017 is set aside. 3.

In view of the aforesaid agreed order, this appeal as also the suit will stand disposed of and necessary application will be filed by either

of the parties before the trial court for disposal of a suit in terms of the present order.

Parties are left to bear their own costs.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J OCTOBER 10, 2017 ib FAO 386/2017