Saurabh Traders through Its Proprietor Saurabh Bansal Vs Swatch Ag & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Saurabh Traders through Its Proprietor Saurabh Bansal Vs Swatch Ag & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with a direction that the parties approach the Trial Court seeking disposal of the suit on the basis of the petitioner/defendant no.2's statement not to use the impugned marks ('SWATCH', 'TISSOT', 'OMEGA', 'RADO', 'LONGINES') and consent to destruction of the watches recovered during execution of the Local Commission; the respondents/plaintiffs stated they shall not insist on seeking damages and costs in the suit.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner/defendant no.2 was willing to make a statement that it will not sell products bearing the impugned marks 'SWATCH', 'TISSOT', 'OMEGA', 'RADO', 'LONGINES' or any other mark identical or deceptively similar to the respondents'/plaintiffs' marks. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the petitioner's statements (undertaking not to use the impugned marks and consent to destruction of the watches recovered during execution of the Local Commission) and the respondents'/plaintiffs' corresponding statement not to insist on damages and costs, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction that the parties approach the Trial Court seeking disposal of the suit on the basis of those statements.

Ratio / Principle

Based on the foregoing, the Trial Court will pass the appropriate orders regarding disposal of the suit.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Trade mark dispute – undertaking and consensual disposal. In CM(M)-IPD 13/2025 (High Court of Delhi, Amit Bansal J, 02.05.2025), Saurabh Traders (petitioner/defendant no.2 in a pending suit brought by Swatch AG & Ors.) stated on instructions before the Court that it shall not use the impugned marks 'SWATCH', 'TISSOT', 'OMEGA', 'RADO' and 'LONGINES', and consented to destruction of watches bearing those marks recovered from its premises during execution of a Local Commission. In light of these statements, the respondents/plaintiffs stated they shall not insist on seeking damages and costs in the suit. The Court disposed of the petition with a direction that the parties approach the Trial Court seeking disposal of the suit on the basis of the petitioner's statements, with the Trial Court to pass the appropriate orders.

$~46.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CM(M)-IPD 13/2025 and CM APPL. 25384/2025

SAURABH TRADERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SAURABH BANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. G. K. Kaushik, Mr. Abhinav Kaushik, Mr. Aman Kaushik and Mr. Rishabh Attri, Advocates

versus

SWATCH AG & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rupesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R % 02.05.2025

During the course of hearing today, counsel for the petitioner/defendant no.2 was called upon to take instructions whether the petitioner/defendantno.2 is willing to make a statement that it will not sell products bearing the impugned marks ‘SWATCH’, ‘TISSOT’, ‘OMEGA’, ‘RADO’, ‘LONGINES’ or any other mark which are identical or deceptively similar to the aforesaid marks of the respondents/plaintiffs.

The matter was passed over for the petitioner to take instructions.

When the matter was called up again, the counsel for the petitioner/defendant no.2, on instructions, submits that the petitioner/defendant no.2 is willing to make a statement that the petitioner shall not use the aforesaid impugned marks.

Counsel for the petitioner/defendant no.2 further submits that the

Page 1 of 2

CM(M)-IPD 13/2025

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 01/07/2025 at 01:06:16

watches bearing the impugned marks which were recovered from the premises of the petitioner during the execution of the Local Commission may be destroyed in the presence of the representatives of the petitioner/defendant no.2 and the respondents/plaintiffs.

In light of the aforesaid statements made by the petitioner, counsel for respondents/plaintiffs, on instructions, submits that the respondents/plaintiffs shall not insist on seeking damages and costs in the suit.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the parties shall approach the Trial Court seeking disposal of the suit on the basis of the aforesaid statements made by the petitioner/defendant no.2.

Based on the above, the Trial Court will pass the appropriate orders.

The present petition stands disposed of.

AMIT BANSAL, J

MAY 02, 2025 ds

Page 2 of 2

CM(M)-IPD 13/2025

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 01/07/2025 at 01:06:16