$~17 and 18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 267/2025 (17) PUSHPA BANSAL TRADING AS M/S AMBICA FOOD PRODUCTS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Saif Khan and Mr. Shobhit Agarwal, Advs.

versus MAHAVEER BANSAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Indraneil Choudhary, Adv.

+ CONT.CAS(C) 668/2025 (18) MAHAVEER BANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Indraneil Choudhary, Adv.

versus SURESH BANSAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through Mr. Saif Khan and Mr. Shobhit Agarwal, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

O R D E R

% 22.01.2026

1. The present petitions allege violation on the part of the respondents with the terms of a Settlement Agreement dated 24.11.2024, entered into between the parties during the course of proceedings in C.O.(Comm. IPD-

CR) No.1 of 2022. .

2. The said agreement imposes certain obligations on the respondent, which inter-alia reads as under:

“1. Party of the first party admits and recognises the proprietary rights of the party of the second party in relation to the trademark ‘SHREE JI’ in relation to wide range of food products for the said business.

2. Party of the First Part further acknowledges that the party of the Second Part is the owner and proprietor of the Artistic Features/

Copyright of in the said SHREEJI label.

3. Party of the first part undertakes not to use landmark ‘SHREEJI’ or any other trademark confusingly similar to the same in any manner whatsoever.

4. Party of the first part further undertakes not to use the artistic work SHREEJI or any other artistic work having substantial reproduction of the same amounting to infringement of copyright.

5. Party of the first part undertakes not to challenge any trademark registrations/pending applications for the mark ‘SHREEJI’ of the Second Party either directly or indirectly and further undertakes to withdraw any such pending cancellations/ opposition proceedings.

6. Party of the first party has filed amendment applications on Form TM-M/Form TM-P before the Trade Marks Office in the Trade Marks Registrations belonging to party of the second part, party of the first part undertakes to withdraw such amendment applications Form TM-

M/Form TM-P.

7. Party of the first party further undertakes not to challenge any copyright registrations/applications of the artistic work SHREEJI belonging to the party of the second part and undertakes to withdraw all oppositions/ cancellations filed thereto.

8. Party of the Second part admits and recognizes the proprietary rights of the party of the First part in relation to the trademark ‘BANSALJI’ & ‘BANSAL’ in relation to wide range of food products for the said business.”

3. It is noticed that vide order dated 29.11.2024, the pending proceedings in this Court were disposed of in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement.

4. Undisputedly, the parties are bound by the Settlement Agreement dated 24.11.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are in flagrant breach of the fundamental terms of the Settlement Agreement inasmuch as the respondent continues to use the mark SHREEJI and is also prosecuting multiple trademark applications for the said mark and derivatives thereof.

6. It is submitted that the said trademark applications were required to be withdrawn by the respondent in terms of the express stipulation/s in the Settlement Agreement.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 24.11.2024. However, he submits that on the very date on which the said Settlement Agreement was executed, another parallel agreement was entered into between the parties which stated that certain monetary payments would be paid by the petitioner to the respondent. However, a perusal of the document which purports to be the said agreement reveals that the contention of the respondent is ex facie untenable for multiple reasons:

(i) the said document is not signed by the petitioner;

(ii) the said document does not even refer to the Settlement Agreemen