Dismissed

Kunj Bihari Food Processors Private Limited v. Shree Shakambari Rice Mill Private Limited & Ors.

Delhi HC22 Oct 2024CS(COMM)/365/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil suit for permanent injunction against trademark infringement was disposed of upon settlement. The defendants undertook to change their marks and packaging, leading the plaintiff to consent. The suit was decreed and disposed.

What did the court decide?

Decree passed in favour of plaintiff in terms of plaint; suit and application disposed of; refund of court fees granted.

Kunj Bihari Food Processors Private Limited… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 365/2024 & I.A. 10174/2024

¶4

KUNJ BIHARI FOOD PROCESSORS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff

¶5

Through: Mr. Prakhar Sharma and Ms. Piya Uppal, Advs. M: 9811819360

¶6

Email: [email protected]

¶7

versus

¶8

SHREE SHAKAMBARI RICE MILL PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. M.K. Miglani, Adv. (Through VC)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶11

O R D E R % 22.10.2024

¶12

The present suit has been filed seeking permanent injunction against the defendants to restrain infringement of the plaintiff’s trademarks, i.e., ‘Kunj Bihari’ and ‘Radha Rani’.

¶13

The present suit has been filed on the ground that the defendants are selling the same products with the same marks as that of the plaintiff.

¶14

The comparison of the defendant’s label with that of the plaintiff’s label, as given in the plaint, is reproduced as under:

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/10/2024 at 14:25:40

¶16

When the matter was listed for hearing on 07^th October, 2024, learned counsel appearing for the defendants submitted that they shall not use the mark ‘Radha Rani’ and shall change the same by adding some other prefix or suffix to the word ‘Radha’.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the defendants has also agreed and undertaken that it shall not hereafter use the trademark ‘Kunj Bihari’ of the

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/10/2024 at 14:25:40

¶20

plaintiff. He further submits that defendant no.1 has got assigned to itself a registered trademark, i.e., ‘Braj Bihari’.

¶21

Thus, it is submitted that the defendants shall use the trademark ‘Braj Bihari’ for its products.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff has no objection to the use of the trademark ‘Braj Bihari’ by the defendants. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff has no objection if defendants use the word ‘Radha’ with some other suffix or prefix other than ‘Rani’.

¶23

Defendant no.1 has further agreed and undertaken that it shall not hereafter use any packaging, which may be deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s packaging of ‘Kunj Bihari’ and ‘Radha Rani’. The defendants further agree and undertake to use its trademark, i.e., ‘Braj Bihari’ and some other prefix or suffix with the word ‘Radha’, other than ‘Rani’, in a totally different style, manner, placement, colour scheme, etc., which shall not be deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s packaging.

¶24

The aforesaid proposal of settlement is acceptable to learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff.

¶25

Considering the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement, the parties submit that a decree may be passed in favour of the plaintiff in terms of the plaint.

¶26

Accordingly, the present suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of paragraph 52 (a) to (c) of the plaint.

¶27

In view of the fact that the parties have settled the matter, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate of refund of full Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff.

¶28

¶29

Decree sheet be drawn up.

¶30

Accordingly, the present suit, along with the pending application, stands disposed of.

¶31

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶32

OCTOBER 22, 2024/kr

¶33

This is a digitally signed order.

¶34

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/10/2024 at 14:25:40

Kunj Bihari Food Processors Private Limited v. Shree Shakambari Rice Mill Private Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunj Bihari Food Processors Private Limited v. Shree Shakambari Rice Mill Private Limited & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Burberry Limited Burberry Limited Vs M/S Petrol Perfume & Ors.

B.M. Gupta and Sons (Huf) Vs Anmol India Dairy and Foods LLP & Ors.

New Balance Athletics, Inc. Vs Pulkit Khubchandani

A2 Interiors Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr Rahul Bhandari & Ors.

Texzone Information Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vision Communications & Anr.

Mother Dairy Fruit and Vegetable Private Limited Vs Moospring Dairy Farm Private Limited & Anr.

Delhi Public School Society Vs M/S Krypton Progressive Educational and Health Care Trust & Ors.

Blackhole Retail (through Its Partner Mr Shahzad Anwar) Vs Ms Pooja

Mr Subrata Kumar Baksi Vs Mr Mahesh Gupta

New Balance Athletics, Inc. Vs Pulkit Khubchandani

Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Limited Vs Cg Power and Industrial Solutions Limited & Anr.

Manash Lifestyle Private Limited Vs Ghanshyam Proprietor of Lakshita Trading Co. & Anr.

Rathi Foundation Vs Lakshmanveer Steel (P) Ltd. & Others

Mother Dairy Fruit and Vegetable Private Limited Vs Moospring Dairy Farm Private Limited & Anr.