Delhi High Court - Orders
Astral Ltd vs Mr. Vipin & Ors on 18 May, 2026
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 1253/2025
ASTRAL LTD. .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Ms. Mahima
Chachalani, Ms. Prashansa Singh, Mr.
Rohit Pradhan, Ms. Sakshi Mr. Ajay
and Mr. Rajat Jain, Advocates.
versus
MR. VIPIN & ORS. .....Defendants
Through: Ms. Mansi Batra, Mr. Vivek Teotia, Mr.
Nikhil Pathania and Ms. Akshiptika
Verma, Advocates for D-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
ORDER
% 18.05.2026 I.A. 13886/2026(Under Order XXIII Rule 3, CPC)
1. This is an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') filed jointly by plaintiff and defendant no.3.
2. Learned counsel for the parties state that the inter se disputes have been resolved amicably. The terms of settlement have been reduced into writing and recorded in para 2 of the present application.
3. The terms of settlement contained in sub-para (i) to (xiv) of para 2 are extracted hereunder:-
"2. The Plaintiff and Defendant No. 3 have arrived at an amicable settlement of their disputes on the following terms and conditions:
i) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, hereby recognizes the CS(COMM) 1253/2025 Page 1 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2026 at 21:11:00 Plaintiff to be the proprietor of the trade marks / ASTRAL formative marks, thereby having the exclusive right to the use of the aforesaid trade marks;
ii) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, undertake to refrain itself, its proprietors, or, partners (as the case may be), its assignees in business, affiliates, associates, predecessors, successors 1n business, its licensees, franchisee, distributors, dealers, stockists, super- stockists, wholesalers, retailers custodians, its relatives, e-commerce and warehouse aggregators, servants, agents and all person claiming through and/ or under them or acting on its behalf from manufacturing, stocking, selling, offering for sale, advertising, distributing, marketing, exhibiting for sale, trading in or otherwise directly or indirectly dealing in selling water tanks, pipes, and fittings or similar goods under the Impugned Marks , or any other marks which may be deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered marks /ASTRAL formative marks, or any mark that may be deceptively similar thereto. That it is, however, clarified that the Defendant No. 3 shall be at liberty to continue its business activities, including manufacturing, stocking, selling, advertising, and distributing its water tanks, pipes, and fittings or similar goods under its own independently adopted trademark, which is distinct and distinguishable, in a manner that does not infringe any valid and subsisting rights of the Plaintiff, which are expressly denied;
iii) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, undertakes that it shall not manufacture, sell, package counterfeit goods under the Plaintiff's registered marks /ASTRAL formative marks, or any mark that may be deceptively similar thereto;
iv) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, also confirm that they have neither applied nor will apply for the registration of any mark that may be deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's prior registered ASTRAL/ ormative marks in the future;
v) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, undertakes that it shall not, in relation to the subject matter of the present dispute and the impugned marks, challenge the Plaintiff's rights, title, goodwill, or reputation u /ASTRAL formative trade marks, either directly or CS(COMM) 1253/2025 Page 2 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2026 at 21:11:00 indirectly.
vi) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, undertakes that they do not have any stationary, packaging, promotional and publicity material under /ASTRAL formative marks;
vii) The Defendant No. 3, without admitting any of the allegations and without prejudice to its rights and contentions, undertakes that they do not have existing stock of finished/unfinished goods under a mark which may be deceptively similar to Plaintiff's registered /ASTRAL formative trade marks;
viii) That in view of the present compromise, it is agreed that the Plaintiff has no objection if the laptop(s) / electronic device(s) lying sealed at the premises of Defendant No. 3 pursuant to the Local Commissioner's visit, be de-sealed and put to use by Defendant No. 3 after the consent decree is passed by this Hon'ble Court;
ix) That the present compromise has been entered into purely to avoid protracted litigation and shall not be construed as an admission of liability, infringement, or wrongdoing on the part of Defendant No. 3, nor shall it be relied upon as a precedent in any other proceedings;
x) The aforementioned undertakings have been tendered by Defendant No. 3, namely, Forno Enterprise, through its proprietor, Mr. Mohd. Farman, who is authorized to represent Defendant No. 3 in this matter, therefore, the same shall be binding on the Defendant No. 3, its relatives, proprietors, or, partners (as the case may be), its assignees in business, affiliates, associates, predecessors, successors in business, its licensees, franchisee, distributors, dealers, stockists, super- stockists, wholesalers, retailers, custodians, servants, agents and all person claiming through and / or under them or acting on its behalf for all times to come;
xi) The Plaintiff gives up cost and damages against Defendant No. 3 as prayed for in the Plaint. Accordingly, the Plaintiff do not press for the relief prayed on Para 47(e) and 47(f) of the prayer clauses of the plaint;
xii) That upon compliance with the terms of the present compromise, the Plaintiff shall have no further claims of any nature whatsoever against Defendant No. 3 in respect of the subject matter of the present suit,
xiii) That the Plaintiff undertakes not to initiate any further civil or criminal proceedings against Defendant No. 3 in respect of the acts complained of in the present suit, subject to compliance of the present terms;
CS(COMM) 1253/2025 Page 3 of 5This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2026 at 21:11:00
xiv) It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the present Memo of Compromise and pass a decree in terms of the present application and in terms of para 47(a) to 47(d) of the prayer clauses of the Plaint."
4. As per sub-para (viii) of para 2, the plaintiff has no objection in case the laptop/electronic device, lying sealed at the premises of defendant no.3 pursuant to the Local Commissioner's execution of the commission, be de-sealed and returned to defendant no.3 for further use. Learned counsel for the defendant no.3 states that an appropriate order in that regard may be passed.
5. Having regard to the fact that the parties have settled their disputes amicably, it would be appropriate to direct de-sealing of the laptop/electronic device seized and sealed during the execution of the commission by the Local Commissioner.
6. The defendant is at liberty to commence usage of the said laptop two days from date after de-sealing in the presence of the counsel for the plaintiff. The date, time and venue for de-sealing the laptop may be mutually decided.
7. All other compliances are stated to be complete.
8. This Court has perused the terms of settlement and finds them lawful. The same appear to be within the contours of Order XXII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the CPC.
9. The parties are bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
10. There appears to be no impediment in case the suit is decreed qua defendant no.3 in terms of the settlement arrived at in para 2 of the present application as also in terms of para 47(a) to (d) of the prayer clauses of the plaint.
11. Let a decree sheet be drawn up in terms of the aforesaid terms of settlement as also in terms of 47(a) to (d) of the prayer clauses of plaint.
12. Suit is decreed and disposed of qua defendant no.3.
CS(COMM) 1253/2025 Page 4 of 5This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2026 at 21:11:00
13. Application stands disposed of in the above terms. CS(COMM) 1253/2025
14. List on the date already fixed i.e. 16.09.2026.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J MAY 18, 2026/anj CS(COMM) 1253/2025 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2026 at 21:11:00