SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. ( 1 ) THE statements of defendants no. 3 and 4 have been recorded on oath. Defendant no. 3 has prayed that he is willing to suffer a decree in terms of prayer clause (i), (ii), (iii) and (v) of para-22 of the plaint and for giving up the relief in prayer clause (iv) of para-22 of the plaint. The said defendant has also given an undertaking to fully cooperate with the plaintiff and disclose names as per the report of the local commissioner to find out the sources of the duplicate goods. ( 2 ) THE said defendant was enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of Delhi, but never practised so and despite this, he has put his board as an advocate on the premises, which is not permissible. The said defendant has also not got his licence suspended to practice as an advocate and has undertaken to remove the said board and to get his licence suspended. ( 3 ) DEFENDANT no. 4 has also made a statement and prayed for a decree in terms of prayer clause (i), (ii) and (iii) of para-22 of the plaint and for giving up the reliefs prayed in clause (iv) and (v) of para-22 of the plaint. ( 4 ) THE aforesaid is acceptable to learned counsel for the plaintiff. ( 5 ) A decree is passed against defendant no. 3 in terms of prayer clause (i), (ii)and (iii) and (v) of para-22 of the plaint and against defendant no. 4 in terms of prayer clause (i), (ii) and (iii) of para-22 of the plaint. The undertaking given by defendant no. 3 is accepted, who shall file an affidavit disclosing the details of the persons whose names appear in the report of the local commissioner and the transactions done. Such affidavit be filed within 15 days with advance copy to learned counsel for the plaintiff and the said defendants will also fully cooperate with the plaintiff to find further such sources of duplicate products. Defendant no. 2 has also undertaken not to manufacture the garments under any well established name since one of the names under which defendant no. 3 was manufacturing the goods is once again another established brand name. ( 6 ) DECREE sheet be drawn up accordingly. ( 7 ) IN the end, I am constrained to observe that defendant no. Defendant no. 2 has also undertaken not to manufacture the garments under any well established name since one of the names under which defendant no. 3 was manufacturing the goods is once again another established brand name. ( 6 ) DECREE sheet be drawn up accordingly. ( 7 ) IN the end, I am constrained to observe that defendant no. 3 had put up his board as an advocate on the premises, though he was not practising, primarily to seek protection of his business under the garb of this noble profession. After getting himself enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi, the said defendant never practised but only carried on business. Since the said defendant has, however, undertaken to get his licence suspended within a week, I deem it appropriate to send an intimation to the Bar Council of Delhi for taking necessary action on such application being filed by defendant no. 3 (Shri Atul Jain, S/o late Shri s. K. Jain), enrolled in and around 1995/1996. ( 8 ) THE Bar Council of Delhi may consider taking appropriate steps to prevent the occurrence of such incident including the feasibility of periodic renewal of licenses by advocates so that persons who do not continue to practice the profession of law, do not seek to identify themselves as advocates and use their status for any oblique purpose. ( 9 ) A copy of the order be sent to the Bar Council of Delhi. IA No. 2918/07 (O. 11 R. 12 CPC)The application does not survive for consideration as the suit itself has been disposed of. Dismissed.