Case Note & Summary
The present Interim Application No. 752 of 2024 was filed by the original plaintiffs, Ramnish Verma and Finesse Fashions Pvt. Ltd., in a pending Commercial IP Suit No. 247 of 2023. The suit was filed against The Haddad Apparel Group Ltd., RJ Corp Ltd., and Varun Jaipuria, alleging trademark infringement and passing off. The plaintiffs sought to amend the plaint to add new trademarks, copyright claims, and additional facts. The application was filed after the suit had been set down for trial and evidence had commenced. The defendants opposed the amendment on grounds of delay, lack of due diligence, and prejudice. The court, after hearing senior counsel for both sides, examined the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and Section 16 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court noted that the proposed amendments were based on facts that were within the plaintiffs' knowledge before the trial began. The plaintiffs failed to provide any explanation for the delay. The court held that the amendments were not necessary for the determination of the real controversy and would cause prejudice to the defendants by prolonging the trial. Consequently, the court dismissed the application with costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Amendment after commencement of trial - The court held that amendment after trial has begun is permissible only if the party could not have raised the matter before trial despite due diligence. The applicants failed to show due diligence as the facts sought to be added were known to them prior to trial. (Paras 10-15) B) Commercial Law - Commercial Suit - Section 16 Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - The court noted that the Commercial Courts Act mandates strict timelines and discourages belated amendments that would delay trial. The proposed amendments were not necessary for deciding the real controversy and would cause prejudice to the defendants. (Paras 16-20) C) Intellectual Property - Trademark Infringement - Delay and Laches - The applicants sought to add allegations of infringement of additional trademarks and copyright, but the court found that these claims were not pleaded earlier and the delay was unexplained. The court held that allowing amendment at a late stage would reopen the entire case and cause irreparable prejudice. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicants/plaintiffs are entitled to amend their plaint after the commencement of trial, and whether the proposed amendments are necessary for determination of the real controversy.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the Interim Application No. 752 of 2024 with costs.
Law Points
- Amendment of pleadings after commencement of trial
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Commercial Courts Act 2015 Section 16
- delay and laches
- due diligence
- prejudice to opposite party
