Allowed

Sandvik Intellectual Property Ab & Anr. v. Mr. Kalyan Singh & Ors.

Delhi HC16 May 2024CS(COMM)/585/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of a summary application (CS(COMM) 585/2021 & I.A. 20916/2023) regarding infringement of patent IN 326138. After the defendant deposited costs for a previous contempt proceeding and conceded to the injunction, the Court passed a permanent injunction decree restraining the defendants from dealing with infringing products while rejecting the plaintiff's claim for reduce

What did the court decide?

Decree of permanent injunction restraining defendants from dealing in products infringing Indian Patent No. 326138; rejection of plaintiff's claim for reduced costs.

Sandvik Intellectual Property Ab & Anr. Vs Mr. Kalyan… — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 585/2021 & I.A. 20916/2023

¶4

SANDVIK INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AB & ANR. .... Plaintiffs

¶5

Through: Mr. Siddhant Chamola and Ms. Pallavi Bhatnagar, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

MR. KALYAN SINGH & ORS. ..... Defendants

¶8

Through: Mr. Neeraj Gogia, Mr. Manu Prabhakar and Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advs. for D-1 & 3.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶10

O R D E R % 16.05.2024

¶11

I.A. 20916/2023

¶12

This application has been filed seeking summary judgment under Order XIII-A Rules 3 and 6(1)(a) read with Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“ CPC ”) in favour of plaintiff.

¶13

An ex parte ad interim injunction was passed in favour of plaintiff on 22^nd November, 2021 restraining inter alia the defendants in dealing with impugned products manufactured by the defendants or in any manner dealing with distributor plates, rotor tip holders and turbo tips compatible with the SANDVIK VSI crushers or any other products which infringe the plaintiff’s suit patents IN 248934, IN 219520 and IN 326138. Defendants thereafter, did not appear before this Court despite advance notice. Defendants’ right to file written statement was closed by order dated 05^th July, 2022 and thereafter,

¶14

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 20/05/2024 at 11:35:41

¶15

they were proceeded ex parte by order dated 25^th August, 2022. The injunction order dated 22^nd November, 2021 was made absolute.

¶16

Pursuant thereto, I.A. 2078/2023 was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC which was heard by this Court on 31^st January, 2024. In terms of the reasons given in the said order, the contempt proceedings were not pressed by plaintiff and directions were given to defendant to deposit costs for Rs.1 Lac within four weeks before the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

¶17

Counsel for defendants has produced a receipt for the said deposit today. The same may be placed on record.

¶18

In these circumstances, counsel for plaintiff seeks a decree of injunction in their favour, to which counsel for defendants has no objection, as stated on instructions.

¶19

The background facts in this matter are narrated in the order dated 22^nd November, 2021 in paras 10 – 16 , which are not being repeated herein and are extracted as under:

¶20

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 20/05/2024 at 11:35:41

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 20/05/2024 at 11:35:41

¶25

It is also informed by counsel for the plaintiff that patents IN 248934 and IN 219520 have since expired and the injunction is sought only in relation to IN 326138.

¶26

Counsel for plaintiff presses for costs as well as legal fee and the amount which was incurred for purchasing products in order to press their contempt. Counsel for defendants refutes the same and states that they have agreed to the injunction despite having put forward their submissions on the

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 20/05/2024 at 11:35:41

¶29

last date, relating to the facts and circumstances of the matter.

¶30

The Court has perused the respective submissions of the parties which are recoded in the order dated 31^st January, 2024. In particular para 10 , it is recorded that a reply was filed by defendants to the application, putting forward their response. The Court had already directed defendant No.1 to deposit costs of Rs.1 Lac to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, which has since been deposited.

¶31

In these circumstances, since the matter has been disposed of at a summary stage upon a concession on injunction by the defendant, the plaintiff’s request for costs of Rs.5 Lacs is not accepted.

¶32

In view of the same, decree is passed in terms of Prayer in para 119(i) of Plaint, which is as under:

¶33

“ A decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants themselves or trading as another entity, their partners, related parties, servants, employees, officers, agents, stockists, distributors, dealers and all others acting for and on their behalf from making, using, selling, distributing, advertising, offering for sale, selling, importing, and in any other manner, directly or indirectly, commercializing or dealing in any product that infringes the subject matter of Indian Patent No.326138.”

¶34

Suit is accordingly, disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous.

¶35

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶36

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶37

MAY 16, 2024/MK/na

¶38

Sandvik Intellectual Property Ab & Anr. v. Mr. Kalyan Singh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandvik Intellectual Property Ab & Anr. v. Mr. Kalyan Singh & Ors.

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

Eastman Auto and Power Limited Vs Shreejee Power Systems LLP

CARS24 Services Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Girnarsoft Automobiles Private Limited & Ors.

Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. Vs Mr. Anil Kumar Thakur

Welspun Enterprises Limited Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Another

Amanpreet Kohli Vs Pankaj Dayal

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs Cactus Pharmaceuticals Private Limited and Others

Spykar Lifestyles Private Limited Vs Shyam Plastic Industries & Ors.

Sumita Rani Prop.Thukral Mech. Works Vs Nitin Machines Tools and Ors.

Kamal Kumar & Ors. Vs Jagteshwar Singh & Anr.

M/S Jaquar and Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Yousaf Thottasseri

Super Seals India Ltd. Vs Sos Automotive Components P.Ltd. and Anr. B+

Luxottica Group S. P. a & Anr. Vs Mify Solutions Private Limited and Ors.

Kbm Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs Subhash Tayal & Anr.

Ht Media Limited Vs Coolboots Media Private Limited