- (1.) This petition is directed against the order dated 12.10.2011, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (here-in-after referred to as the "CPC"). In brief, the petitioner filed the suit for permanent injunction to restrain respondent no.1 from using the registered trade marks "Amin Chand and Sons" and "Landra" used by the petitioner for manufacturing and selling of chaff cutter and its parts. The suit was decreed on 22.03.2005 in the following manner:- "It is ordered that suit titled as Smt. Kalpana Dewan Versus M/s Hindustan Technocast Pvt. Ltd. (suit no.1 of 2000) stands decreed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade marks "Amin Chand and Sons" and "Landra" for manufacturer and sale of chaff cutter machines and part thereof and the suit titled as M/s Amin Chand and Sons and another vs. Smt. Kalpana Dewan (suit no.2 of 2001) stands dismissed."
(2.) The petitioner filed an application under Order 21 Rule 11 of the CPC for the alleged disobedience of the injunction decree on the part of the respondents.
(3.) In reply, the respondents, inter alia, stated that they are not using the trade mark of the petitioner and are manufacturing and selling the chaff cutter and its parts in the name and style of "Hindustan". The Executing Court dismissed the application on the ground that there is no disobedience of the injunction decree as the respondents are no more using the trade marks of the petitioner and the Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree. However, it also observed that the respondent/judgment-debtor cannot be punished under Order 21 Rule 32 of the CPC as the remedy lies under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (herein-after referred to as the "Act").;