Ishi Khosla vs Anil Aggarwal

Delhi High Court

Mrs. Ishi Khosla vs Anil Aggarwal & Anr. on 20 March, 2009

Author: Anil Kumar

* 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.
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 of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The terms of the settlement are incorporated in the application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of 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 a decree for injunction be passed restraining them from using the trade mark of the plaintiff and the plaintiff has agreed to give up his claim of damages against the defendants.
CS(OS) No. 309/2005 Page 1 of 3 The defendants have also agreed to withdraw their application seeking registration of the trade mark 'Whole Foods' and have also agreed to withdraw the opposition filed by the defendants to the application 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.
Consequently, the application is allowed and the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the terms of which are incorporated in I.A. No. 3811/2009 under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC. The application stands disposed of.
CS(OS) No. 309/2005
The parties have settled their disputes and their application incorporating the terms of the settlement being I.A. No. 3811/2009 under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151CPC has since been allowed.
Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties in I.A. No. 3811/2009 under Order XXIII 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 of 3 pending applications are also disposed of and parties are left to bear their own costs.
MARCH 20, 2009 ANIL KUMAR, J. sb

Ishi Khosla Vs Anil Aggarwal

* 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.

 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.

 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