Krbl Ltd vs Lal Mahal Ltd And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 3942 Del

$~

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                               Reserved on: 26th July, 2017
                                           Pronounced on: 04th August, 2017

+     CS(COMM) 929/2016

      KRBL LTD                                                     ..... Plaintiff
                             Through :         Mr.Ajay     Amitabh        Suman,
                                               Mr.Kapil Kumar Giri, and
                                               Mr.Vinay Shukla, Advocates.

                             versus

      LAL MAHAL LTD AND ANR                   ..... Defendants
                   Through : Mr.Mohan Vidhani, Advocate.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

OA No.86/2016

1. This Chamber Appeal is to set aside order dated 21.03.2016 whereby IA No.201/2016 filed on behalf of appellant/plaintiff for bringing an additional list of witnesses on record and summoning 19 more witnesses was dismissed by learned Joint Registrar finding no justifiable grounds for its not filing the list of witnesses within a period of two weeks granted by this Court vide order dated 23.02.2015.

2. Plaintiff says when evidence was being recorded before the learned local commissioner, during his cross examination the witness (PW1)

realized the need to bring on record more witnesses to prove the facts- wrongly denied by the defendant while putting suggestions. Hence the plaintiff filed an additional list of witnesses but its effort failed by the impugned order. The learned counsel for defendant however submits that there is no justifiable ground hence the appeal needs to be rejected.

3. The plaintiff has filed a list of witnesses initially. The witnesses now purported to be summoned and examine are advertising companies, dealers/purchasers of rice & newspaper agencies to prove the plaintiff have been advertising and selling its products under the trade mark claimed for long, hence such witnesses are relevant. The interest of justice shall suffice if the plaintiff is allowed to summon four more witnesses viz. concerned person from a) Heart Throb Advertising and Marketing Pvt. Ltd; b) from PHD Chambers of Commerce and Industry;

c) from Cleghorn Witton Surveyors Pvt. Ltd; and d) from Indian Hotels Company Pvt. Ltd. to prove the invoices/bills etc. Rest of the witnesses are from newspaper offices to prove newspaper cuttings which may even otherwise be proved by producing newspapers.

4. In the circumstances, plaintiff is allowed to bring on record the amended list of witnesses in terms of above, within a week subject to cost of ₹20,000 payable to the learned counsel for the defendant for the delay caused and summons those. The local commissioner to examine the witnesses in a time bound manner.

5. The OA stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 929/2016

6. List before the Local Commissioner on 10th August, 2017 for further directions.

YOGESH KHANNA, J AUGUST 04, 2017 DU