CS (COMM) 67/21

MOHIT VARSHNEY Vs. KAILA AGRO INDUSTRIES

20.08.2022

Present : Sh. Arpit Singh, ld. counsel for the plaintiff.

Sh. Mohan Vidhani and Sh. Prakhar Singh, ld.
Counsels for the defendant.
Written submissions filed on behalf of defendant
alongwith reply to the application U/o 39 Rule 2A CPC and
plaintiffs affidavit regarding application U/o 6 Rule 17 CPC. Copy
given to ld. counsel for the plaintiff who submits that they need
time to go through the written submissions and will also need time
for filing their written submissions. It is being further submitted on
behalf of plaintiff that the main arguing counsel Sh. Ajay Amitabh
Suman and Mr. Shrawan Kumar Bansal are not available today as
Mr. Shrawan Kumar Bansal has been recently appointed as a Patent
Agent and there is a get together organized in their office. As
prayed, let the brief written submissions be filed by the plaintiff
within two weeks with advance copy to the other side. Ld. Counsel
for the defendant submits that the defendant has no objection to the
application of the plaintiff filed U/o 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment
of the plaint being allowed and that the affidavit of Mr. Amit
Singhal, one of the partner of the defendant firm has also been filed
in this regard. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff submits that the plaintiff has
been granted Copyright registration bearing no. A-136824/2021 and
A-136803/2021 recently and that the plaintiff had already disclosed
about filing of the Copyright application in para 6 of its original
Contd...2/-
 -2-
plaint and now the plaintiff is seeking to amend the plaint to
incorporate the factum of plaintiff’s Copyright registration in para 6
of the said plaint. It is being further submitted that the Copyright
registration has been granted to the plaintiff only after institution of
the present suit and that the said amendment is not going to the
change the nature of the suit. It is being further submitted that the
matter is at its initial stages and no prejudice is being caused to the
other side if the proposed amendments are allowed. Considering
the submissions and the facts narrated in the amendment application
and particularly when the proposed amendment is only clarificatory
in nature and the defendant has fairly conceded through the
affidavit of Mr. Amit Singhal, partner of the defendant for allowing
the said amendment, the application U/o 6 Rule 17 r/w Sec. 151
CPC filed by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint is hereby
allowed and the said application stands disposed of accordingly.
The amended plaint filed alongwith the said application is taken on
record. Copy of amended plaint is given to ld. Counsel for the
defendant who seeks four weeks time for filing the amended written
statement. The request is allowed and the replication, if any, to the
amended WS be filed within a week after receipt of amended WS.
An application U/s 151 CPC for correction of the name
of defendant has been filed on behalf of the defendant. It is being
submitted by ld. Counsel for the defendant that the defendant’s
name is being wrongly reflected in the causelist and in some
ordersheets and that the defendant’s name should be typed as ‘Kaila
Contd...3/-
 -3-
Agro Industries’ instead of Kalia Agro Industries. Perusal of the
plaint as well as written statement filed on record shows that the
defendant's name is Kaila Agro Industries but in the causelist
uploaded on the net, the same is being wrongly reflected as Kalia
Agro Industries. The said error is appearing even in today’s
causelist. The Registry is directed to make necessary amendment in
its records and the name of the defendant shall be read in the
proceedings as M/s. Kaila Agro Industries. The application U/s 151
CPC filed on behalf of the defendant hereby stands allowed and
disposed of accordingly.
At the request of ld. counsel for the plaintiff, put up for
completion of pleadings and for arguments on the application U/o
39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC on 27.09.2022.

(Prem Kumar Barthwal)

District Judge (Commercial Court)-01
(South)/Saket Courts,
New Delhi/20.08.2022a