IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Allied Blenders And Distillers Pvt Ltd - Appellant
Versus
Agribiotech Industries Limited (abil) - Respondent
C.S. (Comm) No. 166 of 2020
Decided On : 19-02-2021
Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC - Settlement Agreement - The court decreed the suit as per the terms of the settlement agreement reached between the parties, which included undertakings by the defendant to cease the use of specific trademarks and labels, and the plaintiff's agreement not to pursue certain claims.
Fact of the Case:
The parties filed a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for decreeing the suit as per the terms of the settlement agreement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that nothing remained for adjudication as the parties had settled their disputes, and decreed the suit in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement.
Issues: The main issue was the settlement of the disputes between the parties and the terms of the settlement agreement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the settlement agreement reached between the parties, which led to the decreeing of the suit in accordance with the terms of the settlement.
Final Decision: The suit was decreed in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement, and the application was allowed and disposed of. The plaintiff was entitled to a refund of 50% of the court fee.
JUDGMENT
C .Hari Shankar, J. -
IA 2508/2021 (Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC) and CS(COMM) 166/2020
1. This is a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for decreeing the suit as per the terms of the settlement, which have been arrived at between the parties. The terms of the settlement, as contained in para 2 of the application, may be reproduced.
Choice Blue" trademarks and labels, as stipulated under Paragraph 8 of the Plaint, and that the Plaintiff is also the owner of the copyright in the labels bearing the "Officer's Choice" and "Officer's Choice Blue" trademarks.
b. Subsequent to the filing of the present suit the Defendant undertakes before this Hon'ble Court that it will cease the use of the label/trade dress/ mark as shown below:-
(Hereinafter collectively may also be referred to as the impugned label/trade dress) for all of their goods.
c. The Defendant shall not use in any manner whatsoever the impugned label/trade dress/any mark which is identical/deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's trademarks, "Officer's Choice", "Officer's Choice Blue" and "Choice" as set out in the Plaint, and/or pass off the Plaintiffs goods as their own.
d. The Defendant further undertakes to not infringe upon the copyright in the "Officer's Choice and "Officer's Choice Blue" labels of the Plaintiff.
e. However, it is clarified and agreed between the parties that the Defendant is not by virtue of these compromise terms in any manner refrained, prohibited or restrained from using, manufacturing, trading, selling, exporting, importing, offering for sale, distributing, advertising, directly or indirectly in respect of any alcoholic beverage specially IMFL or goods of any description any label and/or trade dress that may contain / include the colours viz red, white and/or the combination of red and white provided it does not infringe or violates Plaintiffs Trademarks and copyright.
f. The Defendant has applied for the trademark on 23.07.2020 bearing Trademark Application No. 4580698 in class 33 and undertakes to withdraw this trademark application within one week from this Hon'ble Court taking the present compromise application on record.
The Defendant states that it is currently using the following label in yellow colour having pantone shade number P 1-5 C (hereinafter referred to as "New Label").
The Plaintiff has no objection to the New Label.
g. The Plaintiff hereby agrees that it shall not have any objection to the exhaustion of the Defendant's stock bearing the impugned label/trade dress presently in existence and manufactured prior to the order of restraint by tile Hon'ble Court passed on 15.10.2020 (hereinafter referred to as "already manufactured stock of the impugned product"). The particulars of the already manufactured stock of the impugned product have been provided by the Defendant's representative to the Plaintiff's representative, and the same have been reproduced hereinbelow.
h. The Plaintiff hereby agrees and affirms that it shall not pursue its claim for delivery up of the impugned CHETAK WHISKY products, as stipulated in Paragraph 65 (vii) of the Plaint, provided that the Defendant complies and conforms with the compromise terms and conditions as mentioned hereinabove, in letter and spirit.
i. The Plaintiff hereby agrees and affirms that it shall not pursue its claim for rendition of accounts of profit against the Defendant, as stipulated in Paragraph 65(vi) of the Plaint, provided that the Defendant complies and conforms with the compromise terms and conditions prescribed as mentioned hereinabove, in letter and spirit.
j. The Plaintiff hereby agrees and affirms that it shall not pursue its claim for recovery of damages against the Defendant, as stipulated in Paragraph 65(v) of the Plaint, provided that the Defendant complies and conforms with the compromise terms and conditions prescribed as mentioned hereinabove, in letter and spirit.
k. The Plaintiff hereby agrees and affirms that it shall not pursue it
Settlement agreements under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC can lead to the decreeing of a suit in accordance with the terms of the settlement, effectively resolving the disputes between the parties.
The court affirmed that parties may resolve trademark disputes through settlement, provided the terms are adhered to and recognized by the court.
The court upheld the settlement reached under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC, recognizing the plaintiff's rights and binding the parties to the agreed terms.
The court's approval of the settlement agreement and the subsequent decree based on the terms of the agreement.
Settlement agreements can resolve disputes and lead to the decree of a suit in terms of the settlement.
The court applied Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC to decree the suit in terms of the settlement reached between the parties.
The court has the authority to examine and decree a suit based on the terms of settlement between the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.