Allowed

Dabur India Limited v. Goodluck Ayurveda Private Limited

Delhi HC24 May 2024CS(COMM)/97/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plaintiff filed suit for trademark infringement and passing off regarding product HONITUS. Parties reached a mediated settlement. Court decreed the suit based on the Settlement Agreement and ordered refund of court fee before disposing of the matter. Subject to max 60 words.

What did the court decide?

Suit decreed in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 27th March 2024; Settlement forms part of decree; Court fee refunded.

Dabur India Limited Vs Goodluck Ayurveda… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~16

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 97/2023 & I.A. 3487/2023

¶4

DABUR INDIA LIMITED ..... Plaintiff

¶5

Through: Mr. Chrishtopher, Mr. Roshal Lal Goel and Ms. Anju Gupta, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

GOODLUCK AYURVEDA PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Kunwar, Advocate.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 24.05.2024

¶12

The Plaintiff has filed the present suit against infringement and passing off of their registered trademark/ label/ trade dress of the product “HONITUS” by the Defendants.

¶13

During the course of the proceedings, parties were referred to mediation before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, where they have successfully resolved their disputes amicably through execution of Settlement Agreement dated 27^th March, 2024. The Agreement is accompanied with a Board Resolution and Authority Letter in favour of Authorised Representative of Plaintiff and Defendant, respectively.

¶14

Counsel for the parties mentioned in the appearance above confirm the terms of settlement and pray for the suit to be decreed in terms thereof.

¶15

The Court has perused the said terms and finds the same to be lawful. Under the Agreement, the Defendant has acknowledged the rights of the Plaintiff in the trademark “HONITUS” and the trade dress/ label/

¶16

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 02/07/2025 at 14:56:18

¶17

packaging “ ”/ “ ” and has agreed to cease the use of the impugned packaging/ label/ trade dress. Defendant has further modified their packaging as per clause 3(vi) of the Settlement Agreement. In terms of clause 3(iv), the Defendant has remitted an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the Plaintiff, receipt whereof has been confirmed by the counsel for Plaintiff.

¶18

Accordingly, the present suit is decreed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 27^th March, 2024, which shall form part of the decree. Parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement.

¶19

Since the suit is being resolved on the basis of a mediated settlement between the parties, Plaintiff is entitled to refund of court fee. Registry is accordingly directed to issue a certificate for refund of full court fee in favour of the Plaintiff.

¶20

Decree sheet be drawn up.

¶21

Suit and pending application stand disposed of.

¶22

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶23

MAY 24, 2024/ d.negi

¶24

Dabur India Limited v. Goodluck Ayurveda Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dabur India Limited v. Goodluck Ayurveda Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Filmtec Corporation Vs D Rathnakala

Hewlett-Packard Development Comapny & Ors. Vs Suresh Parab & Anr.

Chrysalis Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Sattvam India Ventures Private Limited & Ors.

Portronics Digital Private Limited Vs Tania Ghosh & Ors.

Sanofi India Limited Vs Bullford World Limited & Anr.

1. Star Television Productions Limited & Anr. Vs 1. Eurosport & Ors.

Acquisory Consulting LLP Vs Bcc Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

Sansha Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs M/S United House

Filmtec Corporation Vs D Rathnakala

Hewlett-Packard Development Comapny & Ors. Vs Suresh Parab & Anr.

Sh Raj Kumar Saraf Proprietor M/S Bindal Food Products Vs M/S Alka Ayurvedic Pvt. Ltd.

Red Bull Ag Vs Vandana Chetankumar Maraviya Trading as Vandana Beverages & Ors.

Banyan Tree Holdings Limited Vs Akash Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Mankind Pharma Limited Vs Allkind Healthcare & Anr.