Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Wings Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Genford Drugs Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 51 of 2023 and I.A. 1796 of 2023(Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC)
Decided On : 06-04-2023
Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC - Settlement of dispute regarding trademark/copyright infringement
Fact of the Case:
The dispute between the parties was amicably resolved through a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) regarding trademark/copyright infringement. The terms of settlement recognized the plaintiff as the registered proprietor of the trade mark/copyright ORASORE blue and white Carton Packaging/Trade Dress, MOUTH + FIRST AID, and the defendants undertook to refrain from infringing on the plaintiff's rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court decreed the suit in terms of the settlement, binding the parties to the agreed terms. The plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the court fee, and miscellaneous applications were disposed of.
Issues: The main issue was the infringement of the plaintiff's trademark/copyright by the defendants.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the amicable settlement reached by the parties, recognizing the plaintiff's rights and binding the parties to the agreed terms.
Final Decision: The suit was decreed in terms of the settlement, and the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the court fee. Miscellaneous applications were disposed of.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
C.Hari Shankar, J.
I.A. 6435/2023 (Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC)
1. The dispute between the parties stands amicably resolved. The present application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) has been jointly filed by the parties. The terms of settlement read thus:
"i. The Defendants No. 1 and 3 above named hereby recognizes the Plaintiff is registered proprietor of the trade mark/copyright ORASORE blue and white Carton Packaging/Trade Dress, MOUTH + FIRST AID (Hindi and English) thereby having exclusive right to the use of the said trade marks, the details of which are given in the table below:
TRADE MARK REGISTRATIONS
| S. No. | Trade Mark | No. & Date | Class/goods |
| 1. | ORASORE | 787554 Dt.14/01/1998 | Pharmaceuticals and medical preparations in class 5 |
| 2. | ORASORE MOUTH + FIRST AID in class 5 (Word) | 3506438 Dt. 04/03/2017 | Pharmaceuticals and medical preparations in Class 5 |
| 3. | [IMG] | 3506440 Dt. 04/03/2017 | Dentifrices in class 3 |
| 4. | [IMG] | 3506442 dt. 04/03/2017 | Dentifrices in class 3 |
ii. The Defendants No. 1 and 3 undertake to refrain themselves, their Directors, their assigns in business, licensees, franchisee, distributors, dealers, stockiest, retailers, chemists, from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in medicinal & pharmaceutical preparations under the impugned mark ORASENZ its Packaging/Trade Dress or any other trade mark as may be deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered trade mark ORASORE blue and white Dispenser, Mono Carton and Lami Tube Packaging/Trade Dress amounting to infringement of copyright of the Plaintiff registered.
| Defendant's mark |
| ORASENZ |
| [IMG] |
iii. The Defendants No.1 and 3 confirm that the stock of the medicine under impugned mark ORASENZ, lying with them is as under:
| Impugned Product | Batch No. | Manufacturing Date | Expiry | Qty. |
| ORASENZ | 599 10/2021 | 09/2023 | 55 unites |
iv. The Defendant No.1 and 3 confirm that the batch details of the medicines under the impugned mark ORASENZ, which have not expired as on date are as below:
| Impugned Product | Batch No. | Manufacturing Date | Expiry | Qty. |
| ORASENZ | 599 | 10/2021 | 09/2023 | 55 unites |
v. The Defendant No.1 confirms that the products and/or packaging material bearing the impugned mark ORASENZ, which was seized by the Ld. Local Commissioner on 04.02.2023 shall be destroyed in the presence of the Plaintiffs representative, within 2 weeks of the recording of the present settlement;
vi. The Defendant No. 1 confirms that it shall withdraw the application for ORASENZ (word) under no. 4505994 dated 20.05.2020 in class-05 within a period of 2 weeks of the recording of the present settlement;
vii. The Defendant No. 1 also confirm that apart from the aforementioned application, they have not filed any other application for registration of the impugned mark, namely ORASENZ and ORASENZ blue and white impugned Carton Packaging/Trade Dress which is deceptively similar to Plaintiffs well-known registered trade mark ORASORE registered under no's. 787554 dated 14.01.1998 in class 5, 3506438 & 3506440 dated 4.3.2017 in class 5 & 3, respectively and Plaintiff's copyright registered under no. A-137528/2021 for ORASORE blue and white Carton Packaging Trade Dress;
viii. The Defendant No. 1 agrees, that the trade mark, trade dress/packaging of the Plaintiff's product has acquired well known status in the market, due to its longstanding exclusive and continuous usage amongst the users.
ix. The abovementioned undertakings have been tendered by Mr. Kishor Joshi on behalf of all the Defendants No.1 and 3 and the same shall be binding on the Defendants No.1 and 3, its assignees in business, franchisees, licensees, distributors, dealers and agents for all times to come;"
2. Parties are represented by learned Counsel, who undertake on behalf of their respective clients to abide by the aforenoted terms of settlement.
3. As such, nothing survives for adjudication in the present suit. The suit is accordingly decreed in terms of the aforesaid terms of settleme
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.
Mutual agreement between parties led to the cessation of trademark infringement and settlement terms binding on all parties involved.
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 applied Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC to decree the suit in terms of the settlement reached between the parties.
The court upheld the settlement agreement as lawful and binding, leading to the decree of the suit in terms of the settlement.
Settlement agreements can resolve disputes and lead to the decree of a suit in terms of the settlement.
The court can decree a suit in terms of a settlement agreed upon by the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
Settlement agreements can be used to resolve disputes without delving into the merits of the case, and the court may decree the suit in terms of the settlement agreement.
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
