METROPOLITAN TRADING COMPANY Vs. RAHAT KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(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.