Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Ms Hari Chand Shri Gopal – Appellant
Versus
Shri Dinesh And Company Through Its Proprietor Mr. Dinesh Chandra Gupta – Respondent
CS(COMM) 758 of 2022
Decided On : 22-05-2023
CPC - Settlement Agreement - Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2, Order XXVI Rules 4, 9 and 10, Order XI Rule 1(6), Order XXXIX Rule 4
Fact of the Case:
The disputes between the parties were settled through the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, and a Settlement Agreement was reached. The Court found the terms of settlement to be lawful and decreed the suit in terms of the Settlement Agreement.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the terms of settlement to be lawful and decreed the suit accordingly. The parties were directed to remain bound by the terms of the settlement, and the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the court fee.
Issues: The main issue was the settlement of disputes between the parties and the lawfulness of the Settlement Agreement.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the lawfulness of the Settlement Agreement and the parties' undertaking to remain bound by its terms.
Final Decision: The suit was decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the court fee. The miscellaneous applications were disposed of, and the Mediation Centre was directed to provide copies of the Settlement Agreement to both sides' Counsel.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
CS(COMM) 758/2022, I.A. 17834/2022 (Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC) I.A. 17835/2022 (Order XXVI Rules 4, 9 and 10 of the CPC), I.A. 17836/2022(Order XI Rule 1(6) of the CPC) and I.A. 21728/2022 (Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC)
1. The disputes between the parties stand settled with the intervention of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Settlement Agreement dated 27th March 2023 has been placed on record. The terms of settlement read thus:
"1. The Defendant acknowledges the Plaintiff to be the registered proprietor and prior user of the trademark "GOPAL"(in English and Hindi) by itself or accompanied by numerals or in conjunction with other words or variants including but not limited to GOPAL GRENE, GOPAL GOLD, DELUXE GOPAL ZARDA GRENE, GOPAL 100, GOPAL ZARDA 100, GOPAL 132, GOPAL 60, GOPAL 40, GOPAL 24, 132 etc. (hereinafter GOPAL formative marks) with or without the Lord Krishna Device for tobacco related products including but not limited to chewing tobacco, zarda etc. The list of Plaintiff's GOPAL and GOPAL formative marks is enclosed herewith as Annexure C.
2. The Defendant further acknowledges the Plaintiff's rights in the packaging, get up, shape, lay out, colour scheme i.e. trade dress along with its other essential features and arrangement in any material form being employed by the Plaintiff regarding its products including but not limited to tobacco related products, being sold under the trademark GOPAL (in English and Hindi) by itself or any other GOPAL formative marks and the Lord Krishna Device.
3. The Defendant hereby undertakes that it will not by themselves or through its officers, partners, servants, employees, dealers, distributors, agents, representatives and all others acting for and on its behalf, manufacture, sell, offer for sale, advertise, or deal in any manner whatsoever with tobacco related or allied/cognate products including but not limited to chewing tobacco bearing a `Lord Krishna' Device/Logo; the trade name/trademark/logo GOPAL (in English and Hindi) by itself or any other GOPAL formative marks or any mark which is phonetically or visually deceptively similar to GOPAL, which may amount to infringement of trademark, copyright, passing off, dilution, tarnishment etc.
4. The Defendant also undertakes that it will not use a packaging, get up, shape, lay out, colour scheme, font, manner of writing the mark in repetition across the circumference of the cap etc. i.e. trade dress along with its other essential features and arrangement in any material form including the which may be identical with or similar to that of the Plaintiff's products being sold under the Plaintiffs registered trademarks including but not limited to GOPAL (both in English and Hindi) by itself or any other GOPAL formative marks and/or the `Lord Krishna' Device/Logo, in relation to goods and business identical and/or related/allied products etc., which may amount to infringement of trademark, copyright, passing off, dilution, tarnishment etc.
5. That the Defendant undertakes that it has discontinued manufacturing, promoting and selling tobacco products bearing the mark GOLDEN GREEN, GOLDEN 232, 232 as well as the trade dress and device, as depicted below:
`GOLDEN GREEN' TIN
[IMG]
OUTER PACKAGING FOR THE `GOLDEN GREEN' TINS
[IMG]
`GOLDEN 232 PRODUCTS'
[IMG]
6. That the Defendant hereby undertakes that they have withdrawn all products mentioned at Clause 5 above from the market and will destroy all unsold stock of the said products in the presence of a Plaintiff's representative within a week from the date of decree of the suit.
7. That the Defendant also confirms that they are not dealing in any other products using a trade dress, trademark, packaging, trade name etc. which may be identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs registered trademarks including but not limited to GOPAL (both in English and Hindi) by itself or any other GOPAL formative marks and/or the `Lord Krishna' Device/Logo and the t
The central legal point established in the judgment is the lawfulness of the Settlement Agreement and the parties' undertaking to remain bound by its terms.
The court's approval of the settlement agreement and the subsequent decree based on the terms of the agreement.
Voluntary settlement agreements can effectively resolve disputes and lead to the withdrawal of legal petitions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding nature of a settlement agreement reached between parties, which can lead to the court decreeing the suit in terms of the settlement and....
Settlement agreements can effectively resolve disputes in trademark infringement cases, allowing parties to acknowledge rights and agree on actions to prevent future violations.
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.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the effectiveness of a settlement agreement in resolving a trademark infringement dispute and leading to a decree in favor of the aggrieved part....
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 acknowledgment of proprietary rights in the trademark and copyright, and the lawful disposal of seized goods in accordance with environmental regulations.
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
