Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

922-NMCD-143-2016.

DOC

JSN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY


ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 143 OF 2016
IN
SUIT NO. 305 OF 2016

Gillette India Ltd Plaintiff


Versus
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt Ltd Defendant

Mr Nimay Dave, i/b Mustafa Motiwala, for the Plantiff.


Mr Sumit Raghani, with Hardik Sanghavi i/b Agrud Partners for
Defendant.

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J


DATED: 22nd February 2017
PC:-

1. Mr Dave for the Plaintiffs seeks several weeks time to file a


Rejoinder.

2. Far be it for me to come between Mr Dave and his filings.


since Mr Dave says that there is a substantial Reply and his
Rejoinder is likely to be equally substantial, the Rejoinder is to be
filed and served in the Registry on or before 15th April 2017. I have
no doubt that a Sur-Rejoinder will also then be necessary. Rather

Page 1 of 2
22nd February 2017

::: Uploaded on - 23/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2017 14:35:15 :::


922-NMCD-143-2016.DOC

than wasting time in an application for adjournment: Affidavit in


Sur-Rejoinder to be filed and served on or before 15th June 2017 and
this will be followed by a months time until 20th July 2017 for an
Affidavit in Sur-Sur-Rejoinder.

3. At this point all filings will stop. By then the record should
have crossed at least 2000 pages. It will take any Court some time to
read all this material. Hence, list the matter for direction very low on
board on 3rd November 2020.

4. There is not the slightest urgency, and this is evident from the
delay thus far and the application for three weeks time for an
Affidavit in Rejoinder. Parties are in the meantime free to advertise,
counter-advertise and re-advertise their respective products with
such a statements as they believe are permissible or as their in-house
legal counsel thinks fit.

5. No application for priority hearing will be entertained; at least


not until the Plaintiffs deposit in advance an amount of not less than
Rs.10 lakhs to cover a potential order of costs for this attempt to
consume scarce judicial time in a battle over advertisements of rival
depilation products for women.

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

Page 2 of 2
22nd February 2017

::: Uploaded on - 23/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/02/2017 14:35:15 :::