M/S Integrix(India) Pvt Ltd vs I.P.Address61.24645.254 & Ors
2011 Latest Caselaw 5054 Del

04.
$~
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CS(OS) 582/2006
      M/S INTEGRIX(INDIA) PVT LTD               ..... Plaintiff
                     Through : Mr. B.B. Dhingra, Adv.
                   versus
      I.P.ADDRESS61.24645.254 & ORS DF+          ..... Defendants
                      Through : Ms. Shweta Priyadarshini, Adv. for
                                defendant no.2.
                                Mr. Arun K. Gupta, defendant no.3 in
                                person.
                                Ms. Amrita Singh, Adv. for defendant
                                no.4.
      CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
                 ORDER

% 13.10.2011

1. Admission/denial of documents has not been carried out by

defendant no.4 as defendant no.4 was impleaded as a party to the

present proceedings after the admission/denial of documents had

already been concluded qua defendants no.1 to 3.

2. Let admission/denial of documents filed by defendant no.4 be

carried out by the plaintiff on the affidavit and admission/denial of

documents filed by plaintiff be carried out by defendant no.4 on the

affidavit within four weeks from today.

3. Learned counsel for plaintiff seeks an adjournment, which is

opposed by defendant no.3, who appears in person, as he has been

unnecessarily dragged into this frivolous litigation.

4. Subject to payment of costs of Rs.2500/- to be paid by plaintiff to

defendant no.3 for today's adjournment, list the matter on

19.1.2012.

I.A.NO.3883/2006.

5. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Section 79 of the

Information Technology Act seeking details from defendant no.2.

6. Interim order dated 5.4.2006 stands confirmed till the disposal of

the suit.

7. Application stands disposed of.

I.A.NO.3212/2009.

8. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the amendment

sought by way of present application has already been allowed and

thus the present application may be disposed of.

9. Accordingly, application stands disposed of.

I.A.NO.3362/2009.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no further orders are

required to be passed in this application and the same may be

disposed of.

11. Accordingly, application stands disposed of.

I.A.NO.3881/2006.

12. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not wish to

press present application as he has already filed a subsequent

application for similar reliefs.

13. Accordingly, application stands dismissed as not pressed.

                                                             G.S.SISTANI,J
OCTOBER           13, 2011
msr
CS(OS) 582/2006                                                   2/2