Prathiba M. Singh, J. - (1.) The Petitioner - M/s Psychotropics India Ltd. is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30th August, 2019, by which an application seeking appointment of Local Commissioners in the execution proceedings has been rejected by the Trial Court.
(2.) The background of the case is that the Petitioner/Decree Holder (hereinafter 'Decree Holder') filed a suit for infringement of trademark against the Respondent/Judgment Debtor - M/s Syncom Healthcare Ltd. (hereinafter 'Judgement Debtor'). The said suit was decreed vide order dated 22nd December, 2018. The operative portion of the decree reads as under: "8. For the aforesaid reasons, the plaintiff is entitled to relief of permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off and rendition of account etc. against the defendant as claimed in the suit. Accordingly, the suit of plaintiff is decreed. Plaintiff is, hereby, entitled to followings:- Decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his principal officers, directors, agents, franchisees, servants, licensees and all other acting for and on behalf, from making, selling, offering for sale, advertising and in any manner dealing in any goods or services using the plaintiff trademark CTZ-10 or any other mark/name which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademark CTZ-10 or containing the word CTZ-10 otherwise and from doing any other thing, whereby directly or indirectly infringing the plaintiff's registered trademarks CTZ-10 as claimed in the plaint. Decree of rendition of accounts of profits illegally earned by the defendant by reason of passing off their goods and/or business as the goods and business of the plaintiff. Cost of the suit is awarded in favour of plaintiff."
(3.) It is the submission of ld. counsel for the Decree Holder that the Judgment Debtor did not abide by the decree, leading to the filing of the execution petition. In the execution petition, the Decree Holder sought appointment of Local Commissioners in order to conduct a seizure of the infringing goods. The said application was rejected by the Trial Court on the ground that there was no justified reason for appointment of Local Commissioners. The operative portion of the impugned order is set out hereinbelow:;