$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 341/2025 & I.A. 9644/2025 I.A. 18045/2025 M/S. ASKAAF AL-SHARQ TRADING COMPANY .....Plaintiff Through: Ms. Mahima Chanchalani (Through VC), Mr. Sachin Gupta, Mr. Rohit Pradhan, Mr. Prashansa Singh and Ms. Diksha Tekriwal, Advs.

versus AL-NOOR TRADITION P. LTD. .....Defendant Through: Mr. P.C. Arya, Adv. (Through VC)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 18.12.2025

1. This suit has been filed seeking a permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off and rendition of accounts.

2. This Court vide order dated 29.07.2025, referred the matter to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre [‘Mediation Centre’], for exploring amicable settlement of disputes.

3. Learned counsels for the parties state that the parties have arrived at a settlement and executed a Settlement Agreement dated 16.10.2025 before the Mediation Centre (‘Settlement Agreement’).

4. Learned counsel for the parties states that the parties have entered into a co-existence agreement. They pray that the suit be decreed in terms of this Settlement Agreement.

5. The Settlement Agreement executed before the Mediation Centre, has been placed on record. The Settlement Agreement is duly signed by the parties and their respective counsels.

6. This Court has heard the learned counsels of the parties.

7. The Supreme Court in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd.¹, while dealing with Section 89 of the CPC has observed that the settlement agreement will have to be placed before the Court for recording it; and for disposing of the suit in terms of the settlement, the Court should apply the principles of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement with regard to the subject matter of the suit, to make such settlement effective.

8. This Court has perused the terms of the Settlement Agreement and is satisfied that it fulfills the requirements of Order XXXIII Rule 3 CPC.

9. The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement is lawful and therefore, this Court does not find any impediment in decreeing the captioned suit in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement. The statements and undertaking given by the parties are accepted by this Court, and the parties are held bound by the same.

10. Consequently, the captioned suit is decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 16.10.2025 executed between the parties. The agreement is marked as Exhibit C

11. The Registry of this Court is directed to prepare a decree in terms of this order, and it is directed that the Settlement Agreement dated 16.10.2025 shall form part of the said decree.

Refund of Court Fees

12. Learned counsel for the plaintiff requests for refund of Court fees in view of the settlement arrived between the parties through the process of mediation.

13. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the registry is directed to refund Court Fee in favour of the plaintiff within four [4] weeks, in accordance with law. The said direction has been passed having regard to Section 16 and 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

14. It is clarified that, in the event of any non-compliance with the decree, either party will be at liberty to approach this Court for execution of the decree. In such a case, the party initiating such execution proceedings shall be liable to pay the entire court fees.

15. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

16. All future dates stand cancelled.

17. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J DECEMBER 18, 2025/hp/AJ

1(2010) 8 SCC 24