The dispute between Socomed Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and Amico Pharma regarding packaging artwork was resolved out of court via settlement. The judge disposed of the suit and interlocutory applications.
The suit and Notice of Motion were disposed of; the ad-interim order was vacated; the Court Receiver was discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
6-S715-16+.DOC
SHEPHALI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 715 OF 2016
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO. 2156 OF 2016 AND
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1701 OF 2016
Socomed Pharma Pvt. Ltd. …Plaintiffs
Versus
Amico Pharma …Defendants
Mr. Alankar Kirpekar , for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Viraag Tulazapurkar , with Ms. Souwmya Srikrishna & Mr. Aliasgar Dholkawala and Mr. Sharleen Lobo, i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., for the Defendants.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 28th November 2016
PC:-
1. The Notice of Motion was fully heard and reserved for orders today. Mr. Tulzapurkar for the Defendants and Mr. Kirpekar for the Plaintiffs then agreed to make an attempt at settlement. This dispute has been resolved. The Defendants have forwarded to the Plaintiffs revised artwork. The Plaintiffs have accepted that this revised artwork is not an infringing use. There is a Resolution passed by the
Page 1 of 3 28th November 2016
6-S715-16+.DOC
Plaintiffs’ Board of Directors on 26th November 2016 accepting the revised artwork. Soft copies of the resolution and artwork are annexed to this order.
2. Mr. Shaikh Shafiq Mohammed, authorised signatory of the Plaintiffs is personally present in Court. He confirms that the Plaintiffs are agreeable to this. By way of abundant caution, soft copies of the Resolution and the label artwork are annexed to this order. As regards the word mark, Mr. Kirpekar in fairness did not press for an injunction or any relief. He confines himself to reliefs regarding the artistic work in the label.
3. The Suit and the Notice of Motion are disposed of in these terms. Drawn up decree/order is dispensed with.
4. Refund of Court fees, if any, in accordance with the Rules.
5. The ad-interim order stands vacated. The Court Receiver stands discharged without passing accounts but on payment of his costs, charges and expenses within four weeks from today by the Plaintiffs.
6. In view of this, the Chamber Summons No. 1701 of 2016 does not survive and is disposed of accordingly as infrunctuous.
7. Ms. Srikrishna on behalf of the Defendants states that the Defendants do not have any of the infringing packaging with them. The Defendants will not from today onwards use the previous
Page 2 of 3 28th November 2016
6-S715-16+.DOC
packaging but will use the revised packaging as annexed to this order.
8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
Page 3 of 3 28th November 2016
G. S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
