Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Tata Sons Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Bhushan Udiniya – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for infringement of trade mark and designs, passing off; unfair competition; damages and delivery up against the defendants.
2. Vide order dated 17.08.2021, the matter was referred to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (SAMADHAN) for making an effort to amicably resolve the disputes.
3. This Court is informed that the parties have mutually settled their disputes and the terms of the settlement have been incorporated in Settlement Agreement dated 07.12.2021, which is duly signed by both the sides/parties. The aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.12.2021 has come on record.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of defendants submits that the defendants undertake to abide by the terms of aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.12.2021.
5. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits the terms of settlement are incorporated in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.12.2021 and the present suit be disposed of in terms thereof.
6. Accordingly, the present suit is disposed of in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 07.12.2021. Needless to say, parties shall remain bound by the terms thereof.
7.
Refund of court fees in settled dispute cases.
Mutual settlement of disputes allows court to dispose of suits as per the Settlement Agreement and entitles plaintiffs to complete court fee refunds under established legal precedents.
The validity and enforceability of a Settlement Agreement in resolving disputes and the entitlement to a refund of court fees when disputes are amicably settled.
The court's decision was primarily based on the validity and lawfulness of the Settlement Agreement, as well as the entitlement of the plaintiff to a refund of entire court fees based on relevant leg....
Settlement agreements reached through mediation are binding and enforceable, and parties are entitled to court fee refunds when disputes are amicably resolved.
The court upheld the validity of the Settlement Agreement and allowed for the refund of entire court fees based on relevant legal precedents.
The court decreed the suit in terms of the valid and lawful Settlement Agreement and granted the plaintiff a refund of the entire court fees based on previous court decisions.
Parties may resolve disputes through a valid Settlement Agreement, which the court can incorporate into a decree, and the plaintiff may be entitled to a refund of court fees upon settlement.
A settlement agreement reached by parties in trademark disputes is valid and can lead to a decree in its terms, including the refund of court fees based on amicable resolution.
Amicable settlement in trademark infringement leads to decree of suit and entitlement to court fee refund per established judicial precedents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
