$~1
*
IN THE
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+
CS(COMM) 1062/2016, IA
No.9645/2016 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC), IA No.655/2017 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2
CPC) & IA
No.14937/2017
(u/O I R-10 CPC)
UMRAO HOTELS AND RESORTS PVT LTD .....
Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr. Vinay
Kumar
Shukla & Mr. Pankaj Kumar,
Advs.
Versus
THE UMRAO GRAND & ORS .....
Defendants
Through: Mr. Vijay M. Chauhan, Adv. for
D-2.
Mr. Varun Singh & Ms. Archana
Singh, Advs. for D-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE
MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW O R D E R
% 08.04.2019
1.
The parties in this suit for
permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark and passing off
were vide order dated 16th July, 2018 referred to the mediation cell of this Court.
2.
Mediation has been successful
with the efforts of Mr. Sharat Kapoor, Advocate / Mediator and a Settlement
Agreement dated 12th February, 2019 purporting to be signed by the plaintiff, the defendant
no.3 Jitender Kumar as well as Rishi Sawhney and Amrinder Singh as confirming
parties, has been received from the Mediation Cell of this Court and the
counsel for the plaintiff and the counsel for the defendant no.3 Jitender Kumar
who states that he represents Rishi Sawhney and Amrinder Singh also, support
the Settlement Agreement dated 12th February, 2019.
3.
On verbal request, the said Rishi
Sawhney and Amrinder Singh are impleaded as defendants no.4 and 5 respectively
in this suit.
CS(COMM) 1062/2016 Page 1 of 3
4.
I have perused the settlement
arrived at and find the same to be lawful.
5.
A decree is accordingly passed,
in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants no.3,4 and 5 viz.
Jitender Kumar, Rishi Sawhney and Amrinder Singh, of permanent injunction in
terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 12th February, 2019 which shall form part of the decree sheet.
6.
Decree sheet be drawn up.
7.
The counsel for the plaintiff
states that defendant no.1 The Umrao Grand was a name being used by the
defendants no.3 to 5 and in view of the settlement with defendants no.3 to 5,
the suit insofar as against defendant no.1 be also treated as disposed of.
8.
The counsel for the defendant
no.2 Rahul Gauba states that he has applied for deletion from the array of
defendants. It is stated that the defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba, at the instance
of the defendant no.5 Amrinder Singh had purchased the domain name www.theumraogrand.com, e-mail ID info@theumraogrand.com and the Facebook page „TheUmraoGrand‟ and transferred the same
to defendant no.3 and thus has no stake in the suit.
9.
The counsel for the defendants
no.3 to 5 states that the defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba is the recorded owner of
the domain name www.theumraogrand.com, though the Facebook page was
of the defendants no.3 to 5 and which they have already removed.
10.
The counsel for the plaintiff
states that the plaintiff wants a direction to the defendant no.2 to transfer
the domain name www.theumraogrand.com to the
plaintiff.
CS(COMM) 1062/2016 Page 2 of 3
11.
The defendant no.2 states that he is agreeable to
the said transfer.
12.
Accordingly, insofar as the
defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba is concerned, the suit is disposed of by directing
the defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba as well as the Registrar of Domain Name, stated
to be GoDaddy.com to, immediately on receipt of copy of this order, transfer
the domain name www.theumraogrand.com to the name of the plaintiff.
13.
The defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba is
also restrained by a decree of permanent injunction from registering any other
domain name which is similar or deceptively similar to the domain name www.theumrao.com of the plaintiff.
14.
A decree to the said effect
against the defendant no.2 Rahul Gauba be also drawn up.
15.
The parties are left to bear their own costs.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
APRIL 08, 2019
„gsr‟..
CS(COMM) 1062/2016 Page 3 of 3
