Disposed

Mankind Pharma Limited v. Aquakind Labs LLP & Ors.

Delhi HC18 Dec 2024CS(COMM)/958/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order records the settlement between Mankind Pharma Limited and Aquakind Labs LLP regarding a suit for trade mark infringement and unfair trade practices. The court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants based on the agreed settlement terms, including withdrawal of conflicting trademark applications and restrictions on stock sales.

What did the court decide?

The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of the settlement agreement reached between them.

Mankind Pharma Limited Vs Aquakind Labs LLP… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~55

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 958/2024 & I.A. 48837/2024

¶4

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED .....Plaintiff

¶5

Through: Mr. Ankur Sangal, Mr. Ankit Arvind, Mr. Shashwat Rakshit and Ms. Nidhi Pathak, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

AQUAKIND LABS LLP & ORS. .....Defendant Through: Mr. Sushant Srivastava, Defendant no. 2 in person. (M): 9984646060 Email: [email protected]

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 18.12.2024

¶12

I.A. 48837/2024 (Application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC)

¶13

The present is a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) filed jointly by the plaintiff and the defendants.

¶14

The present suit has been filed seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark, passing off, unfair trade practice, rendition of accounts, damages etc. against the defendants for adoption and use of the infringing trademark/corporate name/trade name, "AQUAKIND"/

¶15

AQUAKIND LABS LLP" /

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

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 23/12/2024 at 12:08:31

¶18

This Court vide order dated 25^th October, 2024 had granted an adinterim injunction against the defendants, restraining them from selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly, dealing in any goods and services under the impugned trademark/trade name "AQUAKIND"/

¶19

AQUAKIND LABS LLP" / , or any other trade mark/ trade name, as may be identical to or deceptively similar with the plaintiff’s registered trademarks ‘MANKIND’ and/or ‘KIND’ formative trademarks and their variants, thereof.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that during the pendency of the present suit, the parties have agreed to amicably resolve the present dispute by way of a settlement, the terms of which, are contained in Para 3 of the present application.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff as well as defendant no. 2, who is the owner of defendant no.1, and present before this Court in person, submits that the suit can be decreed in terms of the settlement between the parties.

¶22

This Court has perused the terms of the settlement and finds the same to be lawful.

¶23

In terms of the settlement, the defendants have acknowledged that the plaintiff is the sole and exclusive proprietor of the trademark/trade name MANKIND’ and/or ‘KIND’ formative trademarks.

¶24

Further, the defendants have agreed and undertaken that they will not use the trademark/ trade name "AQUAKIND"/ AQUAKIND LABS LLP" /

¶25

, or any other trademark/ trade name, as

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

¶28

may be identical to or deceptively similar with the plaintiff’s trademarks ‘MANKIND’ and/or ‘KIND’ formative trademarks.

¶29

Further, the defendants have confirmed that they will withdraw

¶30

application bearing no. 6040767 for in Class 5 and/or any other trademark application/registration, which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s trademarks MANKIND’ and/or ‘KIND’ formative trademarks. They further undertake that they will not file any such trademark applications in the future.

¶31

It is one of the terms of the settlement that the defendants shall be permitted to exhaust the stock seized during the execution of the local commission on 7^th November, 2024, in terms of the order dated 25^th October, 2024, within a period of six months from execution of the present application.

¶32

The defendants further undertake to sell the seized stock only within the territory of Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad and exclusively through its existing four sale counters in Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad.

¶33

Accordingly, the present suit is decreed in favour the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of settlement between the parties, which shall form part of the decree and in terms of prayers a, b, c and d of the plaint.

¶34

The parties are bound by the terms of the settlement.

¶35

The Trade Mark Registry shall expeditiously process the application of the defendants, as and when such application is filed, for withdrawal of the trademark application bearing no. 6040767 for

Page 3 of 4

in Class 5.

Decree sheet be drawn up.

¶40

In view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement, the Registry of this Court is directed to issue a certificate of refund of Full Court Fees in favour of the plaintiff.

¶41

With the aforesaid directions, the present suit along with the pending applications stands disposed of.

¶42

The next dates, i.e., 18^th December, 2024 before the Joint Registrar and 10^th March, 2025 before the Court, stands cancelled.

¶43

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶44

DECEMBER 18, 2024 ak

¶45

Page 4 of 4

¶46

Mankind Pharma Limited v. Aquakind Labs LLP & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mankind Pharma Limited v. Aquakind Labs LLP & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phonographic Performance Limited Vs Mall Hotels Limited & Ors.

Dassault Systemes & Anr. Vs Mr.Sanjay Aggarwal & Ors.

Mr. Piruz Khambatta & Anr. Vs M/S Guruji Trading

Castrol Limited Vs Vikas Mishra

M S Crystal Crop Protection Ltd. Vs Sh Mohinder Prakash Bamane Proprietor of M S Nandai Agro Shopee

Dart Industries Inc. & Anr. Vs Polyset Plastics Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Dart Industries Inc. & Anr. Vs Polyset Plastics Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Aktiebolaget Volvo & Ors. Vs Vaishali Travels & Anr.

Opella Healthcare Group Sas & Anr. Vs Aaeris Lifecare Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Sajid Hussain