Guccio Gucci S. P. A v. Mr Gautham Chand & ORS

#17 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2816/2015 & I.A. 19447/2015 GUCCIO GUCCI S. P. A ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Ranjan Narula, Advocate versus MR GAUTHAM CHAND & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 12.10.2017 Today, learned counsel for the defendants states that the defendant no. 1 is not personally present as he is unwell. He, however, states that the defendants have no objection if the present suit is decreed in accordance with paragraph 32(a) and (b) of the present plaint. Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that he has no objection to the present suit being decreed in accordance with the paragraph 32(a) and (b), provided the defendants also pay the cost incurred for appointment of the Local Commissioner.

Learned counsel for the defendants has no objection to the same. The statements, assurances and undertakings given by both the counsel are accepted by this Court and the present suit is decreed in accordance with the paragraph 32(a) and (b) of the plaint. The Trademark

Registry is directed to dismiss the application being 1817792 filed by the defendants. The defendants shall further pay cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-, i.e., amount spent for appointment of the Local Commissioner to the plaintiff within six weeks. Registry is directed to prepare a decree sheet accordingly. Registry is also directed to issue to an authorised representative of the plaintiff a certificate authorizing him/her to receive back from the Collector half the amount of the Court fee paid by it.

With the aforesaid directions, present suit and pending application stand disposed of.

MANMOHAN, J OCTOBER 12, 2017 rn