Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 13285
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tushar Rao Gedela, J
BIOSTADT INDIA LIMITED VS. SAFEX CHEMICAL INDIA LTD & ORS.
CS(COMM) 416/2022 | I.A. 15226/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shree Sinha, Shivam Tiwari, Tridib Mandal
For the Respondents: Raj Kumar, Deepak Rana, Prince Arora, Wazid Ali
A court may record a lawful compromise between parties and pass a decree in terms of such settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provided the terms are lawful and within the contours of the law.
Headnote:The matter involves an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The plaintiff sought relief against the defendants for trademark infringement. The plaintiff and defendant no. 1 reached an amicable settlement where the defendant undertook not to use, market, or register the "DIAMOND" trademark or any deceptively similar mark and agreed to pay token damages of INR 30,000. The court found the settlement terms to be lawful. The primary issue was whether the compromise arrived at between the parties was lawful and could be recorded as a decree. The court observed that the terms of settlement were within the contours of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and there was no impediment in passing a decree in those terms. The suit is decreed and disposed of qua defendant no.1 in the aforesaid terms.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties may resolve trademark disputes through an amicable settlement and joint application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the court verifies the legality of settlement terms under the code of civil procedure before passing a decree. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. a suit is decreed and disposed of in terms of a recorded lawful compromise. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
O R D E R
I.A. 15226/2026 (Under Order XXIII Rule 3, CPC)
1. This is a joint application filed on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant no.1/M/s Jagdamba Enterprises under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties state that the inter se disputes have been resolved amicably. They further state that the terms of settlement have been reduced into writing and are enumerated in para 3(a) to para 3(d) and up to para 8 of the present appliction. The same are extracted hereunder:
“3. (a) Defendant No. 1 has assured the Plaintiff and has undertaken that it will not directly or through its promoters, shareholders, officers, managers, assigns, successors-in-interest, licensees, franchisees, sister concerns, representatives, servants, distributors, agents, family members, employees, etc. and/ or any person or entity acting for them, manufacture, import, market, offer for sale, sell, supply, export, license, advertise, directly or indirectly infringe the Plaintiffs DIAMOND Trademark or any other mark(s) deceptively similar thereto singularly or in conjunction with any other words or monogram/logo, as a trade mark, service mark, trade name, trading style, domain name, website address, electronic mail identity or in any other manner whatsoever; on or in relation to or any product, services/business including advertising, business papers, etc.
(b) Defendant No. 1 has assured the Plaintiff that it will not directly or through its promoters, shareholders, officers, managers, assigns, successors-in-interest, licensees, franchisees, sister concerns, representatives, servants, distributors, agents, family members, employees, etc. and / or any person or entity acting for them, pass off their products or business, as that of the Plaintiff’s.
(c) Defendant No. 1 has assured the Plaintiff that it will not directly or through its promoters, shareholders, officers, managers, assigns, successors-in-interest, licensees, franchisees, sister concerns, representatives, servants, distributors, agents, family members, employees, etc. and/ or any person or entity acting for them, apply for and / or obtain registration from any competent body or Government authority for DIAMOND Trademark or any other mark(s) deceptively similar thereto singularly or in conjunction with any other words or monogram/ logo in respect of any trade mark, trade name / corporate name, domain name or copyright registration or an other manner whatsoever and/ or for the purposes of using the same as a trade mark, service mark, trading style, corporate name, name of a business entity such as a firm or a partnership, website/ domain and/ or email address and the like.
(d) The Defendant has agreed to pay INR 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) to the Plaintiff as token damages in the present suit.
4. In terms of the aforesaid, Defendant No. 1 is willing to suffer a decree for permanent injunction in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c) of the Plaint.
5. The aforesaid settlement has been arrived with Mr. Raj Kumar, Counsel for Defendant No. 1. The Parties agree that the undertakings given herein shall be binding upon Defendant No. 1 and its promoters, shareholders, officers, managers, assigns, successors-in-interest, licensees, franchisees, sister concerns, representatives, servants, distributors, agents, family members, employees, etc. and/ or any person or entity acting for them.
6. The Plaintiff affirms and confirms that the aforesaid constitute a complete settlement between the parties and henceforth the Plaintiff shall in no manner whatsoe
