IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Orangebelly Food And Beverages Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 119 of 2022
Decided On : 28-04-2023
SOCIAL - Trade Mark Dispute - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order XXIII Rule 3
Fact of the Case:
The dispute between the parties stands settled through a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC. The terms of settlement acknowledge the Plaintiff as the prior adopter and proprietor of the trade mark 'SOCIAL' and its variants. The Defendant undertakes to refrain from using the trade mark 'SOCIAL' and any deceptively similar marks, withdraw pending trade mark applications, discontinue advertising and domain names, and remain bound by the terms of settlement.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the terms of settlement to be in order and in accordance with the law, leading to the decree of the suit in terms of the settlement. The plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the court fees, if any.
Issues: The main issue was the settlement of the trade mark dispute between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC and the terms of settlement agreed upon by the parties.
Final Decision: The suit stands decreed in terms of the settlement, and a decree sheet will be drawn up accordingly. The next date fixed in the suit shall stand cancelled.
ORDER (Oral)
I.A.8270/2023 (under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC) in CS(COMM) 119/2022
1. The dispute between the parties stands settled and the present joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) has been filed by the parties. The terms of settlement read thus:
"A. The Defendant acknowledges that the Plaintiff is the prior adopter and the proprietor of the trade mark 'SOCIAL' and all its variants, as have been mentioned in paragraphs 9, 12, 14 & 42 of the plaint;
B. The Defendant acknowledges the fame and reputation of the aforesaid trade marks in India and undertakes never to challenge the rights of the Plaintiff with respect to the above trade marks at any time, in any proceedings in courts of law or otherwise, anywhere in the world, including India.
C. The Defendant further undertakes to this Hon'ble Court that the Defendants, their directors, partners, employees and assigns (a reference to assigns will hereinafter include any associated and/or group company of the Defendants) will with immediate effect do as under:
i) refrain from using the trade mark `SOCIAL' and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs trade mark 'SOCIAL. either as, a trade mark or part of a trade mark, a trade name and/or corporate name or in any other manner whatsoever so as not to infringe the Plaintiffs trade mark and/or pass off its goods or business as and for the goods or business of the Plaintiff for all times to come;
ii) the Defendant its directors, employees and assigns shall discontinue the use of the trade mark 'SOCIAL' within four weeks from March 31, 2023 and undertake never to use the same and/or any other deceptively similar trade mark for all times to come;
iii) the Defendant shall withdraw the trade mark application for the trade mark "SOCIAL KULTURE" bearing number 5196543, which is pending before the Trade Marks Registry with immediate effect. Further the trade mark application for [IMG] bearing number 4197702 in class 43 of the Defendant has been refused and the same shall not be revived;
iv) never apply for the registration of the trade mark `SOCIAL' and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar to the trade mark 'SOCIAL' and/or any trade mark in which the word `SOCIAL' is forming a part, for all times to come either in India or anywhere else in the world:
v) never oppose any application filed by the Plaintiff for the trade mark `SOCIAL' and/or any other trade mark in which the word 'SOCIAL is forming a part and/or its variants in India or anywhere else in the world;
vi) shall not open any other outlet in India or anywhere in the world using the trade mark 'SOCIAL KULTURE' and/or any other trade mark in which the word "SOCIAL" and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar thereto, is forming a part and/or using any other indicia to show that it is in any manner connected and/or affiliated with the Plaintiff;
vii) discontinue advertising the offending trade mark and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar to the trade mark 'SOCIAL' at Zomato, Facebook, Instagram and Google location link, and/or any other website that it may have advertised the said trade mark within tour weeks from March 31, 2023, and shall never advertise the aforesaid trade mark tor all times to come on the world wide web;
viii) discontinue the domain name https://socialkulture.in/ to the Plaintiff at its own cost within four weeks from March 31, 2023:
ix) not adopt any domain name in which the Plaintiff's trade mark `SOCIAL' or any other deceptively similar trade mark is a part:
D. The Defendant shall suffer a decree in accordance with prayer A of the plaint;
E. The Defendants further state on solemn oath before this Hon'ble Court as under:
i) that they shall remove the display of the offending trade mark and/or any other trade mark deceptively similar to the trade mark `SOCIAL' on various social media websites including, Facebook, Instagram and shall never advertise the aforesaid trade mark and/or any oth
The main legal point established is the enforceability of the terms of settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC in settling the trade mark dispute.
Enforceability of settlement agreement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
Amicable settlement between parties can lead to the decree of a suit and resolution of the dispute without further adjudication.
Enforcement of settlement terms and direction to cancel infringing marks by the Trade Marks Registry
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.
The court applied Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC to decree the suit in terms of the settlement reached between the parties.
Mutual agreement between parties led to the cessation of trademark infringement and settlement terms binding on all parties involved.
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.
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.