RFA No.1035 of 2022 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 266 JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA Vs Vs Vs Vs ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Present: Mr. Gurdeep Grewal, Advocate for Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for the HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the decree dated 06.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonipat, whereby the suit preferred at the instance of the respondent plaintiff for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction under the Provisions of CPC read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, stands partly decreed. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant wishes to withdraw the present appeal Dismissed Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. July July July July 00008888, 202 , 202 , 202 , 2026666 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable RFA No.1035 of 2022 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH RFA RFA RFA RFA No. No. No. No.1035 1035 1035 1035 Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA JITENDER RANA ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR ASHOK KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Gurdeep Grewal, Advocate for Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for the appellant. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the 06.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonipat, whereby the suit preferred at the instance of the respondent plaintiff for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction under the Provisions of CPC read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, stands At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant wishes to withdraw the present appeal as the matter is compromised. Dismissed as withdrawn. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH 1035 1035 1035 1035 of of of of 2022 2022 2022 2022 (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision Date of Decision: : : : 00008888.0.0.0.07777.202 .202 .202 .2026666 ...... ...... ...... ......Appellant Appellant Appellant Appellant ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondent ....Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJAAAA Mr. Gurdeep Grewal, Advocate for By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment and 06.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sonipat, whereby the suit preferred at the instance of the respondent plaintiff for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction under the Provisions of CPC read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, stands At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant wishes as the matter is compromised. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 1 judgment and and Sessions Judge, Sonipat, whereby the suit preferred at the instance of the respondent- plaintiff for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction under the Provisions of CPC read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, stands At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant/defendant wishes MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.08 16:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment