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]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Aiwa Co. Ltd vs Vishal Bharatkumar Parwani on 19 December, 2022

Author: Amit Bansal

Bench: Amit Bansal

$~12
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+       CS(COMM) 588/2022, I.A. 13559/2022

        AIWA CO. LTD                                            ..... Plaintiff
                           Through:      Mr.Zeeshan Khan and Mr.Ayush
                                         Samaddar, Advocates

                           versus

        VISHAL BHARATKUMAR PARWANI                 ..... Defendant
                     Through: Mr.Anil Dutt and Ms.Debolina Roy,
                              Advocates
        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

                           ORDER

% 19.12.2022

1. Counsels for the parties submit that the matter has been settled.

2. The terms of the settlement are as follows:

(i) The defendant shall not use the trademark 'AIWA'/ in respect of any of his products. The defendant has no objection to a decree being passed in this regard.
(ii) The defendant shall pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as legal costs to the plaintiff.
(iii) The defendant shall be permitted to sell the seized goods upon removal of all the references to the trademark of the plaintiff on the same in the presence of a representative of the plaintiff. This exercise shall be done within ten days from today.

3. In view of the above, counsel for the plaintiff does not press for the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT BANSAL CS(COMM) 588/2022 Signing Date:20.12.2022 Page 1 of 2 11:49:22 reliefs as sought in prayer clause (ii) and (iii).

4. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of the terms of settlement recorded above.

5. Since the matter has been settled, in view of the observations of the Supreme Court in the judgment of High Court of Judicature at Madras, Represented by its Registrar General v. M.C. Subramaniam and Ors., (2021) 3 SCC 560, followed by this Court in Western Infrabuild Products LLP v. Western Steel India and Ors., 2022 (89) PTC 407 (Del), the Registry is directed to refund the entire court fees in the name of Mr.Rahul Chaudhry, the plaintiff counsel, in terms of Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

AMIT BANSAL, J.

DECEMBER 19, 2022/tp Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT BANSAL CS(COMM) 588/2022 Signing Date:20.12.2022 Page 2 of 2 11:49:22