Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 46861
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Kumaresh Babu, J
Kailash Chand Surana – Appellant
Versus
Chagan Lal M – Respondent
O.A.Nos.103 & 104 of 2026 | A.No.681 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.Jayesh Kumar Daga
For the Respondents: R.Dilli Kumar, R.Rajarajan
A civil suit for trademark infringement may be disposed of by a court based on a Joint Memorandum of Compromise filed by the parties, which then becomes a part of the final court decree.
Headnote:The present case involves a civil suit for trademark infringement and passing off under the Trademarks Act, 1999 and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant used deceptively similar trade marks for hardware products. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement. The core issue before the court was whether the suit could be disposed of based on the settlement reached between the parties. The court recorded the Joint Memorandum of Compromise, acknowledging the consensus between the parties and their legal representatives, thereby resolving the dispute through mutual agreement. The suit is disposed of in accordance with the terms of the Joint Memorandum of Compromise, which is to form part of the decree.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court records compromise in trademark dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing on either side would submit in unison that the parties to the suit have settled the dispute among themselves and to that effect, have also filed a Joint Memorandum of Compromise signed by both the plaintiff and the defendant. The same has also been acknowledged by the respective learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Recording the said Joint Memorandum of Compromise, the suit stands disposed of on the terms of the Joint Memorandum of Compromise filed on 29.05.2026. The said Joint Memorandum of Compromise shall form part and parcel of the decree. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected applications are closed.
3. Registry, High Court of Madras, is directed to grant necessary refund of Court fee as applicable in the name of the plaintiff.
