Grindwell Norton Limited v. Preetham Reddy
Digitally signed by KAWRE KIRAN KALYAN Date:
2025.09.29 16:12:10 +0530 KAWRE KIRAN KALYAN 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 34887 OF 2024 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2007 OF 2025 Grindwell Norton Limited ...Applicant/Plaintiff
Versus
Preetham Reddy & Ors.
...Defendants WITH COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 233 OF 2025 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 11706 OF 2024 WITH LEAVE PETITION (L) NO. 34392 OF 2023 WITH COURT RECEIVER'S REPORT NO. 50 OF 2024 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 233 OF 2025 _______ Mr.Hiren Kamod a/w Rohan Lopes & Karan Khiani i/b Rashmi Singh for Plaintiff. Mr. Deepak Bhalerao, Second Assistant to Court Receiver, Present. _______
CORAM
:
ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
th SEPTEMBER 2025 DATE :
P.C.
th 1.
The matter is today on board in the backdrop of the order dated 17 September 2025 by which this Court had noted that the defendants had not
2/4 denied the factum of having committed contempt of the ex-parte interim order th December 2023 passed by this Court.
dated 18 2.
It was at the request of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendants on the previous occasion that the matter was stood over today, since learned counsel had on the previous occasion submitted that he would need time to take instructions from the defendant for the aspect of payment of some costs. The matter was stood over today after specifically recording as follows: 3.
Mr. Tyagi, learned counsel appearing (virtually) on behalf of the defendants submits that on instructions from the defendant, who he submits is present with him, the matter be stood over next week. He submits that the defendant shall offer payment of some costs.
th September 2025 3.
Mr. Kamod, today submits that after the order dated 17 was passed the advocates for the applicant/plaintiff had in fact addressed two emails to the defendants advocates. However, the same had not been responded to.
4.
It is thus that Mr. Kamod today submits that the defendants have acted in contempt of the order of this Court. Additionally, he points out that the defendants are not present either personally or through advocates. He thus
3/4 submits that notice be issued to defendant Nos.1 & 2, requiring their physical presence in Court on the next date.
5.
Having heard Mr. Kamod and having perused the previous orders passed, I find merit in the submissions made by Mr. Kamod. Hence issue notice to defendant Nos.1 & 2 whose details are as follows: 1.
Mr. Preetham Reddy #21, Narayana Reddy Industrial Area Old Madras Road, Doorvaninagar Bangalore - 560016 2.
Salaka Shalini Devi #21, Narayana Reddy Industrial Area Old Madras Road, Doorvaninagar Bangalore - 560016 6.
It is made clear that if on the next date respondent Nos.1 & 2 are not present, the Court would ensure their presence by issuing appropriate warrants th October 2025 (HOB).
against them, returnable on 8 7.
It is made clear that if on the next date, the respondents do not appear in person, this Court would be constrained to issue bailable warrants to secure their presence.
4/4 8.
A copy of this order shall be served upon respondent Nos.1 & 2 by the advocates for applicants/plaintiff who shall support the same by way of affidavit. (ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)