Allowed

Usv Private Limited v. Panacea Biotec Limited

Delhi HC17 Feb 2020CS(COMM)/714/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court, in CS(COMM) 714/2019, disposed of an application seeking a decree after the plaintiff and defendant settled their trademark dispute regarding VIBACT/ViLACT/VILACT marks and a monetary payment, resulting in the suit being decreed based on the settlement terms.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed in terms of settlement; applications for injunction disposed as infructuous; Court fee returned.

Usv Private Limited Vs Panacea Biotec Limited — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2020)

¶1

$~25

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 714/2019

¶4

USV PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Represented by: Ms.Vasundhara Majithia, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

PANACEA BIOTEC LIMITED ..... Defendant Represented by: Mr.Ankur Sangal, Ms.Sucheta Roy and Ms.Richa Bhargava, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶8

O R D E R % 17.02.2020

¶9

I.A. 2231/2020 (under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC)

¶10

By this joint application, plaintiff and defendant seek decree in the suit in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶11

Taking the terms of settlement on record and decreeing the suit in terms thereof, application is disposed of.

¶12

CS(COMM) 714/2019

¶13

Plaintiff and defendant have settled the dispute in the suit on the following terms and conditions as mentioned in para-2 of I.A. No.2231/2020 as under:

¶14

a) The Defendant acknowledge the Plaintiff to be the proprietor of the trademark VIBACT.

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

CS(COMM) 714/2019

¶17

b) The Defendant from 1^st February, 2020 will cease using “ViLACT” and commence using the amended version “VILACT” and/or “VILACT” formative marks for products manufactured by the Defendant that contain Vildagliptin by incorporating the following changes:

¶18

The Defendant will use „I‟ in capital letter instead of „i‟

¶19

in lowercase.

¶20

The Defendant on all of its packaging and promotional

¶21

material will add the विलए्ሴ in Hindi along with the mark in English as described below:

¶22

Existing Usage Proposed Usage

¶23

c) The Defendant will pay a settlement amount of INR 40,00,000 (Indian Rupees Forty Lakhs only)(inclusive of applicable income tax, but exclusive of GST) to the Plaintiff towards full and final settlement of above dispute by way of demand draft on the day of the recordal of the present compromise.

¶24

d) A joint statement agreed to by both parties attached as DOCUMENT A may be used to address any queries from the market in relation to this dispute. No other statement or communique outside the scope of this joint statement will be issued by either party.

¶25

e) The Plaintiff will treat the above as a full and final settlement of the present dispute and will not object to the Defendant‟s use of the mark“ViLACT” for its Vildagliptin products manufactured up to 20^th December, 2019 and use of the mark “VILACT” (as enumerated in 2 (b) above) for Vildagliptin products manufactured by the Defendant or by its any other affiliate / subsidiary including Panacea Biotec Pharma Limited from 1^st February, 2020.

¶26

CS(COMM) 714/2019

¶27

Page 2 of 3

¶28

The application is duly signed by Shri Sandeep Rathore, authorised signatory of the plaintiff and Ms.Monika Rajdan, authorised representative of the defendant and duly supported by their affidavits.

¶29

Authorisations in favour of Shri Sandeep Rathore and Ms.Monika Razdan have been annexed as Annexure (c) and (d) to the application.

¶30

Consequently, the suit is decreed in terms of the settlement as noted above.

¶31

Decree sheet will incorporate the terms of settlement.

¶32

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that a demand draft for a sum of ₹40 lakhs plus GST totalling to a sum of ₹43.20 lakhs has been handed over to the learned counsel for the plaintiff in term of clause –C of the settlement.

¶33

Since the parties have entered into a settlement, Court fee be returned to the authorised representative of the plaintiff under Section 16A of the Court Fees Act.

¶34

Registry will issue necessary certificate in this regard.

¶35

I.A. 18156/2019 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC) I.A. 932/2020 (under Section 151 CPC-by defendant)

¶36

Applications are disposed of as infructuous.

¶37

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶38

FEBRUARY 17, 2020 ‘vn’

¶39

CS(COMM) 714/2019

¶40

Page 3 of 3

Usv Private Limited v. Panacea Biotec Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usv Private Limited v. Panacea Biotec Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Intec Infra-Technologies Private Limited Vs Bim Integrated Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Chanel Sarl Vs M/S Preet Buckle House

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp & Anr. Vs Zifam Pinnacle Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Hari Om Gupta Vs Today Homes and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

M/S. Brio Bliss Life Science Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Nishu Medical Store & Ors.

B K G Overseas & Anr. Vs B K G Glass International & Anr.

Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr. Mehtab Sindhu

Vestige Marketing Private Limited Vs Vestige Labs Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Smt. Parminder Kaur Khurana Vs Shri Ravinder Singh & Another

Bikash Kumar Singhdeo & Anr. Vs Mool Chand Sharma & Ors.

Retail Royality Company & Anr. Vs Golden Eagle Investigation Services Pvt. Ltd.

Gammon India Ltd. & Ors. Vs National Highways Authority of India

Mr. Chetan Singh Vs Mr. R.C. Chadda

Tejbir Singh Vs State & Ors.