IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. Kores (India) Ltd. ..Plaintiff versus M/s. Eagle Industries ..Defendant Mr.Dhond for the Plaintiff Mr.Sanjeev Hariakar for the Defendant CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. P.C. 1. Learned Counsel for the defendant has tendered in the Court an affidavit in the nature of undertaking executed by in all three persons, namely Mr. Ramjibhai Detroja, Arvind Detroja and Suresh Detroja The said undertaking relates to use of design of carbon paper manufactured by the defendants and the specimen carbon paper is annexed to the said undertaking. Learned Advocate for the defendants states that his client shall abide by the undertaking and the design as can be seen on the carbon paper annexed to the affidavit. Similarly, the learned advocate for the defendants tenders in the Court an empty cartoon in which the carbon papers manufactured by the defendants are to be kept. The learned advocate for the defendants -2- states that in future the defendants shall use the design on the picture on the cartoon as per the specimen cartoon tendered in the Court and shall abide by this arrangement in future. The learned advocate for the defendants upon instructions from his client orally undertakes to this Court that in future the defendants shall not use the cartoon at Exhibit D and the paper at Exhibit E to the plaint, or any other deceptively similar cartoon or paper. In view of the written undertaking given by the parties namely the partners of defendants through their advocates as well as the oral undertaking given by the learned advocate for the defendants as stated above, the suit stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid undertaking with no order as to costs. (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) -3- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.689 of 2008. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.689 of 2008. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.689 of 2008. IN IN IN SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. Kores (India) Ltd. ..Plaintiff versus M/s. Eagle Industries ..Defendant Mr.Dhond for the Plaintiff Mr.Sanjeev Hariakar for the Defendant CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. P.C. 1. This motion is taken out by the plaintiffs so as to initiate action against the defendants under Order 39 Rule 2(A) of C.P.C. on the ground that the defendants have violated the Order dated 3.10.2006. 2. The defendants have filed affidavit clarifying their stand with regard to the motion being affidavit dated 18.3.2008. 3. I have heard learned advocates on both the -4- sides. It is required to be mentioned that the defendants have changed the design of the carbon paper which they intend to sell in the market and they have also changed the design of the cartoon in which the carbon papers are to be packed, and that design is accepted by the plaintiffs a little prior to passing of this Order. The suit is ordered to be disposed of by recording necessary undertaking on behalf of the defendants. 3. I have perused the affidavit dated 18.3.2008. In the normal course it was open for the defendant to file detail affidavit in reply controverting the affidavit in support of the notice of motion. The defendants have come out with an unconditional apology in the affidavit and in my view, since the entire dispute is settled between the parties, no order is required to be passed in this motion, particularly when the defendants have tendered an apology. In my view this is a fit case where the motion can be disposed by accepting the apology tendered by the defendant in terms of affidavit dated 18.3.2008. Hence the Order. -5- ORDER i. Apology tendered by the defendant No.2 in terms of affidavit dated 18.3.2008 is accepted. Motion stands disposed of in terms of this acceptance, with no Order as to costs. (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) -6- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3365 of 2006. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3365 of 2006. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3365 of 2006. IN IN IN SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. SUIT NO.2805 of 2006. Kores (India) Ltd. ..Plaintiff versus M/s. Eagle Industries ..Defendant Mr.Dhond for the Plaintiff Mr.Sanjeev Hariakar for the Defendant CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. DATED : 27th August, 2008. P.C. 1. Since Suit 2805 of 2006 is disposed of, this notice of motion does not survive and the same is also disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.)