Trademark infringement suit over 'CURLS' snacks. Suit already decreed against manufacturer defendants nos. 2 and 3 by settlement. Court decreed suit against retailer defendant no. 1 in terms of plaint paras 58(a)-(c), without costs or damages.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DFM FOODS LIMITED .....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Dhruv Anand, Ms. Udita Patro, Ms. Sampurnaa Sanyal, Ms. Nimrat Singh, Advocates (M:9870201041)
versus
CHANDEL STORE & ORS. .....Defendants Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
O R D E R % 11.03.2025
I.A. 39202/2024 (Application under Order XIII-A Rules 3 and 6(1)(a) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 CPC)
Page 1 of 5
CS(COMM) 513/2022
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 17/03/2025 at 11:41:19
“xxx xxx xxx
5. As per the settlement, the defendant nos. 2 and 3 have acknowledged the plaintiff, to be the proprietor of the trademark ‘CURLS’. The defendants have further acknowledged that by manufacturing, offering for sale, stocking, selling or otherwise
dealing in products, bearing deceptively similar mark and/or the ‘CURLS’ trademarks of the plaintiff, the defendants have violated the trademark rights of the plaintiff.
6. Further, the defendants have undertaken not to import, offer for sale or supply etc. in goods bearing the deceptively similar mark
and/or ‘CURLS’. Further, the defendant no. 3 has undertaken to discontinue the manufacture and sale of infringing ‘CURLS’ products.
7. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against defendant nos. 2 and 3, in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07th February, 2024, and in terms of para 58 (a) to (c) of the plaint, which shall form part of the decree.
xxx xxx xxx”
3. This Court notes that in the written statement filed on behalf of the defendant no. 1, it has been stated as follows:
“xxx xxx xxx
25. That the contents of para 25 of the suit are wrong, manipulated and denied that around the last week of May, 2022, the Plaintiff first came to know about the infringing use of the mark ‘CURLS’ when the Plaintiffs representatives came across an infringing ‘CURLS’ corn based snack product being sold by the Defendant No.1 in Patna, Bihar. It is submitted that the Defendant No.1 has never sold the corn based snack product of the Plaintiff and violated and infringed the rights of the Plaintiff mark of CURLS. The Defendant No.1 has a small retailer shop. The Plaintiff is bound to produce substantial material on record due to that this Hon'ble Court may be satisfied to that extent that the Defendant No.1 has violated and infringed the trade mark of the Plaintiff. Only the photographs of the shop is not sufficient to accrue cause of action against the Defendant No. 1. It is
Page 2 of 5
CS(COMM) 513/2022
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 17/03/2025 at 11:41:19
also submitted that the submissions of the Plaintiff is a planned in nature against the Defendant No.1, hence the Defendant No.1 may be deleted from the array of the parties of the present suit.
xxx xxx xxx”
Page 3 of 5
CS(COMM) 513/2022
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 17/03/2025 at 11:41:19
Page 4 of 5
CS(COMM) 513/2022
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 17/03/2025 at 11:41:19
the stand taken by defendant no. 1 in its written statement, the present suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against defendant no. 1, in terms of Para 58 (a) to (c) of the plaint.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
MARCH 11, 2025
au
Page 5 of 5
CS(COMM) 513/2022
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 17/03/2025 at 11:41:19
1 issue framed by the court
Whether summary judgment under Order XIII-A should be decreed against defendant no. 1 despite its written statement denying sale of infringing 'CURLS' products.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
DFM Foods Limited
Chandel Store
Chandel Store
Defendant no. 3
Mini Pushkarna
As recorded by the court registry
A suit of a commercial nature above the specified value, governed by the Commercial Courts Act 2015.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
