Disposed

Mw Eat Ltd. v. M/S. Corum Hospitality and 2 Others

Bombay HC2 Dec 2016NMS/651/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court settled the suit and notice of motion based on consent terms. The court accepted the transfer of a disputed mark/logo and monetary consideration as agreed, disposed of the suit and notice without a drawn-up decree, and directed parties to implement the terms.

What did the court decide?

Suit and notice of motion disposed of according to consent terms; drawn-up decree dispensed with.

Mw Eat Ltd. Vs M/S. Corum Hospitality and 2… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

905-S416-14+.DOC

¶2

SHEPHALI

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

SUIT NO. 416 OF 2014 WITH

¶5

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 651 OF 2014

¶6

…Plaintiff

¶7

MW Eat Limited…Plaintiff
Versus
M/s. Corum Hospitality & Others…Defendants

¶8

Ms. Roshani Naik, i/b Khare Legal Chambers, for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Alankar Kirpekar, with Mr. Muralidhar Khadilkar, Ms. Jaya
Manghwani, Mr. Shekhar Bhagat & Mr. Aakash Joshi, i/b MAG
Legal, for Defendants Nos. 1 and 2.

¶9

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 2nd December 2016

¶10

PC:-

¶11

1.The Suit and the Notice of Motion are settled. Consent
Terms have been drawn. These are signed by a representative of the
Plaintiff in England; on behalf of Defendants Nos. 1 and 2; and by
the parties’ respective Advocates. The Consent Terms are taken on
record and marked “X” for identification. For clarity, it is noted that
the original Consent Terms are those on white paper and that the
ledger paper (engrossment) version is a copy. This is because it was
the white copy that was couriered from London.

¶12

2.I am satisfied that the Consent Terms are in order, that they
are not contrary to law, and that they have been drawn by the parties
of their own volition in reflection of their true intentions. The

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

2nd December 2016

¶15

905-S416-14+.DOC

¶16

Consent Terms provide specifically for the transfer of the disputed
mark/logo by the Defendants to the Plaintiff and for the cessation of
the use of that mar by the Defendants. Provisions are also made in
clause 11 for a monetary consideration to be paid by the Plaintiff to
the Defendants. The undertakings in the Consent Terms are
accepted as undertakings to the Court.

¶17

3.The Suit is disposed of in accordance with the Consent
Terms. There will be no order as to costs.

¶18

4.Drawn up decree is dispensed with. However, if for the
purpose of implementation of these Consent Terms, should the
parties require a drawn up decree, they will be entitled to apply to
the Department for one without having to make a separate
application in that behalf and on production of an authenticated
copy of this order. Drawn up decree is to be strictly in accordance
with these Consent Terms.

¶19

5. Refund of court fee, if any, in accordance with the Rules.

¶20

6.In view of this, the Notice of Motion itself is also disposed of
in accordance with the consent Terms. There will be no order as to
costs.

¶21

7. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶22

Page 2 of 2
2nd December 2016

Mw Eat Ltd. v. M/S. Corum Hospitality and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mw Eat Ltd. v. M/S. Corum Hospitality and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rksv Securities India Private Limited Vs Sunlight Broking LLP

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Reliant Chemicals

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs Reliant Chemicals

Sunita Vinay Mehendale and Ors. Vs Kusum Shrinivas Javalgekar

Zainuddin Hakimudding Arzoo Vs Abbasbhai Fidahussain Bohra

Mw Eat Ltd. Vs M/S. Corum Hospitality and 2 Others