Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M/S.Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd vs M/S.Khadim India Ltd on 30 March, 2021

Author: C.V.Karthikeyan

Bench: C.V.Karthikeyan

                                                                                         C.S.No.648 of 2014


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 30.03.2021

                                                           CORAM:

                                    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

                                                     C.S.No.648 of 2014


                   M/s.Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd.,
                   9/8, Dwaraka Colony,
                   Brindavan Street, Mylapore,
                   Chennai - 600 004
                   represented by its
                   Senior Vice President - Group Legal &
                   Company Secretary,
                   Mr.Ramaprasad.S                                                         ... Plaintiff
                                                        ..Vs..

                   M/s.Khadim India Ltd.,
                   37, Mount Road,
                   Chennai 600 002.                                      ... Defendant
                   PRAYER : Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 CPC read with Order IV

                   Rule 1 O.S.Rules read with Sections 142 of the Trademarks Act, 1999,

                   prayed for a Judgment and Decree:-



                                   (a) a declaration that the threat issued by the Defendant through its

                   counsel vide legal notice dated 10.09.2014 is unjustified and groundless.




                  1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                       C.S.No.648 of 2014




                                   (b) a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant by itself, its

                   Directors, servants, agents, distributors, importers, stockists, clearing and

                   forwarding agents, successors, assigns or any and / or all of them from in

                   any manner threatening the Plaintiff herein, directly or indirectly, in any

                   manner by notices, advertisements, circulars, etc., regarding use of the mark

                   PRO or PROACTIVE and thereby interfere and / or harm the business of the

                   Plaintiff in any manner whatsoever.



                                   (c) Direction to the defendant to compensate the plaintiff a sum of

                   Rs.10,00,000/- or such other amount as this Hon'ble Court may determine

                   after the records are produced for the damages sustained on account of the

                   unjustified and groundless threats made by the defendant.



                                   (d) An order as to costs of the proceedings.



                                       For Plaintiff    : M/s.Chandhini Pradeep Kumar

                                       For Defendant    : M/s.S.Manjula

                                                          *********


                  2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                        C.S.No.648 of 2014



                                                       JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the plaintiff had filed the following memo dated 25.03.2021. It is as follows:

"The plaintiff above named humbly submits as follows:
1. That the plaintiff and the Defendant herein have entered into an agreement of compromise in C.S.No.28 of 2015 filed before Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta, by which they have agreed to settle their disputes amicably without proceeding to any legal actions against each other. A copy of the terms of settlement is annexed herewith as Annexure - "A".
2. In view of the above agreement, the subject matter of the present civil suit has come to a closure.

Therefore, the present plaintiff craves leave of the Hon'ble Court to withdraw the present civil suit.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.S.No.648 of 2014 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J rna Dated at Chennai on this 25th day of March 2021.

sd/---, Counsel for Plaintiff."

2. In view of the same, suit is dismissed as withdrawn. The Memo and the Annexure shall form part of the decree. No order as to costs.

30.03.2021 Index : Yes / No Web : Yes / No rna C.S.No.648 of 2014 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/