* IN
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No. 309/2005 % Date of
Decision: 20.03.2009 Mrs. Ishi Khosla . Plaintiff Through: Mr. Nitin Sharma and
Mr. Ankush Mahajan, Advocates.
Decision: 20.03.2009 Mrs. Ishi Khosla . Plaintiff Through: Mr. Nitin Sharma and
Mr. Ankush Mahajan, Advocates.
Versus
Anil Aggarwal & Anr. . Defendants Through: Mr. Ajay Amitabh
Suman and Mr. Shashi
P. Ojha, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
1
Whether reporters of Local papers may be YES
allowed to see the judgment?
2
To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3
Whether the judgment should be reported in NO
the Digest?
ANIL KUMAR, J.
*
+ IA No.3811/2009 in CS(OS)
No.309/2005
This is an application by the parties for
decreeing the suit in terms ofthe settlement arrived at between the parties.
The terms of the settlement areincorporated in the application under Order
XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(hereinafter referred to as ’CPC’) being
I.A.
No. 3811/2009. Under the settlement, the defendants have agreed that adecree
for injunction be passed restraining them from using the trade mark ofthe
plaintiff and the plaintiff has agreed to give up his claim of damagesagainst
the defendants.
CS(OS) No. 309/2005 Page 1 of 3 The defendants
have also agreed to withdrawtheir application seeking registration of the trade
mark ’Whole Foods’ and havealso agreed to withdraw the opposition filed by the
defendants to theapplication of the plaintiff for registration of the trade
mark ’Whole Foods’.
The application is signed by the plaintiff and
defendants and their
respective counsels and is also supported by the affidavits of Mrs. Ishi
Khosla, plaintiff and Mr. Anil Aggarwal, defendant No. 1 and the sole
proprietor of defendant No. 2. There does not seem to be any impediment in
allowing the application.
respective counsels and is also supported by the affidavits of Mrs. Ishi
Khosla, plaintiff and Mr. Anil Aggarwal, defendant No. 1 and the sole
proprietor of defendant No. 2. There does not seem to be any impediment in
allowing the application.
Consequently, the application is allowed and
the suit of the plaintiffis decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at
between the parties, the termsof which are incorporated in I.A. No. 3811/2009
under Order XXIII Rule 3 readwith Section 151 CPC. The application stands
disposed of.
CS(OS) No. 309/2005
The parties have settled their disputes and
their applicationincorporating the terms of the settlement being I.A. No.
3811/2009 under OrderXXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151CPC has since been
allowed.
Consequently,
the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of thesettlement arrived at
between the parties in I.A. No. 3811/2009 under OrderXXIII Rule 3 read with
Section 151 CPC. Decree sheet be drawn where I.A. No.3811/2009 shall form part
of the decree. All the CS(OS) No. 309/2005 Page 2 of3 pending applications are
also disposed of and parties are left to bear theirown costs.
MARCH 20, 2009 ANIL KUMAR, J. sb
CS(OS) No. 309/2005 Page 3 of 3
CS(OS) No. 309/2005 Page 3 of 3
No comments:
Post a Comment