- (1.) Notice of motion. Shri Amrit Paul, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Heard.
(2.) This appeal has been filed against order dated 22.12.2005, vide which, application of the appellant, for grant of interim injunction, was dismissed. So far as merits are concerned, after hearing counsel for the parties, this Court feels that no case is made out for interference in view of observations made by the Court below in paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the order, under challenge.
(3.) At the time of arguments, Shri P.C.Markanda, Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellant states that the material/ software etc., of the appellant, which was lying under lock and key, after taking over possession of the same by the respondents, may not be mis-used. He prayed that directions be issued in that regard. It has been said that orally, to that extent, request was made before the Court below. A perusal of the order, under challenge, does not indicate the same, as such, no finding can be given by this Court in that regard. As prayed, liberty is granted to the appellant to move an application, as per law, to get the requisite relief regarding its averment, as made above. It is made clear that if any such application is moved within a week from today, the competent court shall dispose of/ decide the same within ten days thereafter. Appeal stands disposed of. Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.;