Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Sabhyasachi Gorai – Appellant
Versus
Aveenshi International Private Limited Anr. – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
I.A. 20786/2023 in C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 174/2021
1. This is a joint application by the petitioner and Respondent 1, effectively seeking a modification of order dated 31 July 2023 whereby the present petitions were decreed in terms of settlement agreement dated 31 May 2023. The application avers that there were certain inadvertent errors in the settlement agreement dated 31 May 2023 which stand corrected in an amended settlement agreement dated 25 September 2023. The terms of settlement as per the amended settlement agreement dated 25 September 2023 read thus:
"1. That Aveenashi International hereby assigns, permanently and irreversibly, the trademark LAVAASH (No. 3993269) in class 43, which hereafter will be owned by Sabyasachi Gorai, singly.
2. That Aveenashi International hereby assigns, permanently and irreversibly, the trademark LAVAASH BY SABY (No. 3993270) in class 43, hereafter to be singly owned by Sabyasachi Gorai.
3. That the aforementioned assignments are complete and shall include the goodwill vested in these trademarks.
5. That Sabyasachi Gorai as consideration for the above-mentioned assignment of trademarks is making a payment of Rs.2 lacs to Aveenashi Intern
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to allow modification of an order to correct inadvertent errors in a settlement agreement, effectively assigning trademark....
Allegations of fraud do not negate arbitration clauses unless proven to affect the validity of the entire agreement, thus allowing disputes to be referred to arbitration.
Enforceability of settlement agreement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
The court's decision was influenced by the binding nature of the settlement agreement, which required the defendants to acknowledge the plaintiff's trademark and cease all use of the impugned marks.
The acknowledgment of proprietary rights in the trademark and copyright, and the lawful disposal of seized goods in accordance with environmental regulations.
The Registrar of Trade Marks must issue notices under Section 25(3) to the registered proprietor to ensure compliance before trademark removal; failure to do so enables renewal despite lapse.
Termination of Trademark License Agreements and execution of a new assignment deed invalidated the respondent's claim.
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
