SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 2901

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Relaxo Footwears Limited – Appellant
Versus
Nikhil Footwears & Anr. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 425 of 2021, IA 11591 of 2021 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC), I.A. 7428 of 2022 (Order I Rule 10 of the CPC), I.A. 7673 of 2022 (Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC)
Decided On : 14-02-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Saif Khan and Mr. Shobhit Aggarwal, Advocates, for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Vaibhav Vutts, Advocates, for the Defendant.

Recognition of exclusive proprietary rights in designs and prohibition of imitation, settlement as a basis for decreeing the suit, and foregone claim for damages and account of profit.

Headnote:

Settlement - Intellectual Property Rights - The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, recognizing their exclusive proprietary rights in the designs and prohibiting the defendants from using or imitating the plaintiff's designs in any manner. The defendants agreed to pay a one-time litigation cost and the plaintiff forewent its claim for damages and account of profit.

Fact of the Case:

The disputes between the parties were settled with the defendants acknowledging the plaintiff's exclusive proprietary rights in the designs and agreeing to refrain from using or imitating the designs. The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff based on the settlement terms.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the settlement between the parties resolved all disputes, and nothing further required adjudication. The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff based on the settlement terms.

Issues: The main issue was the recognition of the plaintiff's exclusive proprietary rights in the designs and the agreement by the defendants to refrain from using or imitating the designs.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the settlement terms, which acknowledged the plaintiff's exclusive proprietary rights and prohibited the defendants from using or imitating the designs. The court found that the settlement resolved all disputes and decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff.

Final Decision: The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff based on the settlement terms, and both parties were entitled to a refund of the court fee. The defendants agreed to pay a one-time litigation cost, and the plaintiff forewent its claim for damages and account of profit.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

CS(COMM) 425/2021 and IA 2894/2023 (Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC)

1. The disputes between the parties stand settled in the following terms:

    "(i) The defendants acknowledge and recognize the plaintiff's sole and exclusive proprietary rights and interests in the plaintiff's designs being Product-1 to Product-9 (as annexed with the plaint), which are subject matter of the captioned suit i.e., C.S. (Comm.) 425 of 2021.

    (ii) The defendants undertake that shall never use for manufacturing, marketing, distributing, selling (online/offline/directly or indirectly), offering for sale, advertising, or howsoever otherwise, dealing in any product in any other manner referred to as Product-1 to Product-7 to the plaint and/or any other products, bearing designs which are an obvious or fraudulent imitation of plaintiff's aforesaid designs, amounting to infringement/piracy of registered designs, as applicable, through its assigns, franchisees, agents, or any entity incorporated by the defendants or anyone acting for and on their behalf.

    (iii) The defendants undertake that in future, they shall never use for manufacturing, marketing, distributing, selling (online/offline/directly or indirectly), offering for sale, advertising, or howsoever otherwise, dealing in any product in any other manner referred to as Product-1 to Product-9 in the plaint and/or any other products, bearing getup/trade dress which are an obvious or fraudulent imitation of plaintiff's aforesaid products amounting to passing off, through its assigns, franchisees, agents, or any entity incorporated by the defendants or anyone acting for and on their behalf.

    (iv) The Parties subject to the aforementioned, have agreed that the Commercial Suit for Infringement of design, passing off, unfair competition, delivery up, rendition of accounts, damages, etc. being C.S. (Comm) 425 of 2021, shall be decreed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in terms of the prayer clause (a) and (b) of Para 40 the Plaint.

    (v) The Defendants hereby declare and confirm that they are not in possession of any stock of the impugned products being Product 1 to Product 9. The Plaintiff accepts the statement made in this regard and hereby agrees to give up its claim in the prayer in Para 40 (c) of the plaint.

    (vi) The Defendants (both Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2) agree to pay the Plaintiff a one time and total combined amount of Rs.1,50,000 (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) as part litigation cost, which is being paid by way of Cheque/DD No 000045 drawn on IDFC First Bank.

    (vii) In view of the aforesaid undertakings, assurances and declarations by the Defendants, the Plaintiff agrees to forego its claim against the Defendants on account of damages for losses suffered by it and rendition of account of profit, etc. in terms of the prayer in Para 40 (d) and (e) of the plaint."

2. Learned Counsel, who are present in Court, agree on behalf of their respective clients to abide by the aforesaid terms of settlement.

3. As such, nothing survives for adjudication in the present suit and the counter-claim. The suit is accordingly decreed in terms of the aforesaid terms of settlement. Let a decree-sheet be drawn up by the Registry accordingly. Miscellaneous applications are also disposed of.

4. Both sides would be entitled to refund of the court fee, if any, deposited by them.

5. Mr. Vutts, learned Counsel for the defendants, has handed over in Court, a cheque to Mr. Khan, learned Counsel for the plaintiff, for Rs.1.5 lakhs in terms of the aforesaid settlement.

6. Order to be uploaded on the website of this Court within 24 hours.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top