An Ad-Interim order has been passed by the Delhi High Court’s Single Judge Bench consisting of Justice Mukta Gupta restraining manufacturing, marketing, sale, etc. of alcohol under the mark of “Vintage Moments”. The court said that the plaintiff has without a doubt made out a prima facie case on the basis of the documents filed and the sales figure shown by them. The suit was filed by the manufactures of the alcohol brand Magic Moments. The order was granted on the grounds that if no injunction is granted the plaintiff could suffer irreparable loss.
Radico Khaitan, the plaintiff in the case, claims to one of the nation’s largest liquor companies having 400 wholesale distribution centers, accounting for 95% of the retail outlets all over the nation, having sales figure of Rs. 1,71,238.26 lakh in India and Rs. 2,169.28 overseas (for the year 2019-20). The company sells gin, vodka, etc. under the trademark ‘Magic Moments’, which they adopted in the year 1997. The plaintiff brought that the defendants are using the name of “Vintage Moments” and the mark stood objected by the Trademark Registry showing that predominant marks registered with the word “Moments” belong to the plaintiff. The advocates for the plaintiff were Anirudh Bakhru, Ishani Chandra, Ankit Rastogi, Ayush Puri, Raghu Vinayak Sinha, and Ritika Sharma and the defendant was represented by Advocate Ankit Popli.
The court further ordered that “Considering the averments in the plaint as also the documents filed therewith the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case in its favor and in case no ad-interim injunction is granted, the plaintiff will suffer and irreparable loss. The balance of convenience also lies in favor of the plaintiff. Consequently, an ad-interim injunction is passed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in terms of prayer (i) of para-6 of I.A.9245/2020 till the next date of hearing. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court”.
[READ ORDER]
Law Firm’s Plea for Termination of Senior Associate Dismissed by Delhi HC with Rs. 35,000 in costs
Legal Insiders
Apr 16, 2021
Tanya Sehrawat
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
32 Shares
A Law firm had filed a plea in the Delhi High Court against its Senior Associate who wanted to resign. Instead of accepting her resignation, the firm terminated her services instead. The Court dismissed the same and imposed the penalty of Rs 35,000. A single-judge Bench of Justice Navin Chawla passed the order. The order ofAdditional Senior Civil Judge was challenged by the firm, Banana IP Counsels LLP, in which its application was rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil...
Nizamuddin Markaz Can be Opened for Ramadan Subject to COVID19 Protocols, Center to Delhi High Court [READ ORDER]
Judiciary
Apr 15, 2021
Shreyas Nair
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
5 Shares
The Delhi High Court was informed today by the Central Government that the mosque at Nizamuddin Markaz can be made operational for devotees to give prayers for Ramadan, which begins on (April 14, 2021), according to the Delhi Disaster Management Authority's (DDMA's) guidance for Covid-19, and that social distancing will be observed at the mosque. The central government submitted to Justice Mukta Gupta during the hearing of a petition by the Waqf Board seeking the reopening of the Nizamuddin...
626 Views
![Ad-Interim Order Passed by Delhi High Court to Restrain the Sale and Marketing of alcohol under the mark of “Vintage Moments” [READ ORDER]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_9427_hc.jpeg)
![Nizamuddin Markaz Can be Opened for Ramadan Subject to COVID19 Protocols, Center to Delhi High Court [READ ORDER]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2021/04/lj_3728_delhi.jpg)
Facebook Comments