Delay-related expenses cannot be automatically imposed, rules Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court, a court in India, has made a ruling regarding costs for delay in filing a written statement in a commercial suit. However, the applicability of this ruling to the current commercial suit between Dabur and an unspecified opponent is not yet clear, as it only applies to cases involving a prior cautionary order.
In a significant decision, the High Court set aside a ₹12 lakh cost imposed by the trial court on VI-John Healthcare for a 48-day delay in filing the written statement in a trademark infringement suit. The High Court ruled that the delay was not inordinate as it was well within the outer limit of 120 days prescribed for filing such statements in commercial suits.
The Court found the reasons for the delay to be justified and criticized the trial court for mechanically imposing costs without considering the circumstances. Consequently, the High Court condoned the delay and quashed the cost order, emphasizing that delay costs should not be imposed mechanically but only with justifiable grounds.
The ruling states that a trial court cannot solely base the costs on a prior cautionary order without considering subsequent developments or the merits of the explanation offered. It suggests that the court should consider subsequent developments and the merits of the explanation before imposing costs.
The case that this ruling is based on is John Vs Dabur India, a previous trademark dispute. However, it is important to note that this current commercial suit is not explicitly stated to be part of the litigation news or a continuation of the John Vs Dabur India case.
The details of the costs imposed in the current commercial suit are not yet disclosed. The ruling does not specify any particular consequences for non-compliance with the suggested considerations in this commercial suit. It also does not specify any consequences for non-compliance with the suggested considerations in the John Vs Dabur India case.
This article requires a subscription to access its content. It is important to note that this news article is about a trial court's decision to impose costs for delay in filing a written statement in a commercial suit involving a name trademark issue.
[1] Source Link 1 [2] Source Link 2 [3] Source Link 3 [4] Source Link 4 [5] Source Link 5
This article discussing a High Court ruling unveils the acceptable criteria for imposing delay costs in commercial suits, particularly trademark disputes. The court emphasizes that the reasons behind the delay must be justified, and mechanical imposition of costs without considering the circumstances should be avoided.
This newfound guideline derives from the John Vs Dabur India case, yet it remains unclear whether the current commercial suit in question is connected to the John Vs Dabur India litigation, as the article does not explicitly state otherwise.
