https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197927 In trademark, copyright and patent suits, the proviso to Order XVII Rule 1(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure was emphasised as requiring day-to-day hearing once trial begins, unless exceptional reasons are recorded. The text stresses that intellectual property litigation should not be prolonged by repeated interlocutory contests or avoidable adjournments, and that courts should ordinarily aim for prompt final adjudication within a short time frame. Interference with the impugned injunction order was declined, and the proceeding was disposed of with directions and observations to secure expeditious conclusion of the suit. en-us Mon, 07 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jan 2018 11:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197927 In trademark, copyright and patent suits, the proviso to Order XVII Rule 1(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure was emphasised as requiring day-to-day hearing once trial begins, unless exceptional reasons are recorded. The text stresses that intellectual property litigation should not be prolonged by repeated interlocutory contests or avoidable adjournments, and that courts should ordinarily aim for prompt final adjudication within a short time frame. Interference with the impugned injunction order was declined, and the proceeding was disposed of with directions and observations to secure expeditious conclusion of the suit. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 07 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197927