(1.) BY order dated 20th September, 2013, this Court decided the Arbitration Appeal No.19/2012 wherein it was held that both the parties would strictly comply with all the terms and conditions arrived at between the parties in Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 21 st July, 2004, until the Arbitrator passed the Award, as a temporary arrangement. Both the parties were granted time to file the undertaking by way of affidavits.
(2.) IN the pending contempt proceedings bearing No.114/2012, by order dated 31st July, 2013, earlier the Court directed Mr.Jaysukhbhai Odhavjibhai Patel, partner of respondent No.1 and Managing Director of respondent No.5 -Company to remain present on the next date. He was also directed to file the complete statement on affidavit as to the number of pieces of clocks of the kind referred to in the said order which have been sold after 3 rd October, 2012 along with the details of invoice and value stated therein. In the said proceeding, the contention of Mr.Dushyant Dave, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners was that, "the respondents are selling clocks (which are not LCD or LED clocks) even today through another entity by the name of Oreva Marketing Company." The petitioner was also directed to file an affidavit giving details in this regard.
(3.) THE respondents' have also filed the contempt petition being CCP(O) No.15/2013 which is pending. According to the respondents, the petitioners themselves are not complying with clause 2 of the MOU whereby the petitioners were not entitled to use the trademark ORPAT in respect of wall - clocks and timepieces but despite of the same, they are continuously using the said name on their wall -clocks and timepieces and are also using the mark QUARTZ by selling their products which is reflected in their boxes, packaging material, catalogue and literature and other places in respect of wall -clocks and time pieces in violation of the MOU and the orders dated 17th May, 2012.