Hero Motocorp Limited & Anr. Vs Mr. Shiv Kumar Gupta & Anr.

The present suit has been filed seeking a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from infringement of design and copyright, passing off, and unfair competition, as well as for rendition of accounts of profits, on the grounds that the Defendants were manufacturing and selling motorcycle engine oil in containers identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s, including packaging/labeling that was similar to the Plaintiff’s packaging/label.

¶11

This Court vide order dated 04.10.2023 passed an ex parte ad-interim injunction order restraining the Defendants from using the containers/packaging, labels, and designs which were a substantial imitation of the Plaintiffs’ Hero 4T Motorcycle Engine Oil containers, labels, get-up, shape, colour combination and configuration.

¶12

This Court vide order dated 01.08.2025, on joint request of the parties referred the matter to the Delhi High Mediation and Conciliation Centre, for

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 15/10/2025 at 12:09:38

¶15

exploring amicable settlement of disputes. The mediation has resulted in the successful settlement of disputes.

¶16

The settlement agreement dated 16.07.2025, executed before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, has been placed on record.

¶17

Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing [‘VC’] link and have been identified by the learned counsel for the plaintiff.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that the terms and conditions agreed between the parties are set out in the settlement agreement dated 16.07.2025.

¶19

She states that Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have paid over a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs to the plaintiff towards damages and have undertaken to destroy the bottles and labels, which were seized during the local commission within a period of four (4) weeks.

¶20

Defendants have interacted with the Court and submit that they undertake to comply with its obligations set out in the settlement agreement dated 16.07.2025.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants (in person through vc) state that they are bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025, and the suit may be disposed of in terms thereof.

¶22

The Supreme Court in ‘ Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd.’¹ , while dealing with the Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [‘CPC’] has observed that a settlement

¶23

1 (2010) 8 SCC 24.

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 15/10/2025 at 12:09:38

¶26

agreement executed between the parties should be placed before the Court for recording it and disposing of the suit in its terms. And, while dealing with the settlement, the Court should apply the Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement in regard to the subject matter of the suit, to make such settlement effective.

¶27

This Court is satisfied that the compromise arrived between the parties as contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025 satisfies the requirements of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. 12. The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025 is lawful and therefore, this Court does not find any impediment in decreeing the captioned suit in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025. 13. The statements and undertaking given by the parties are accepted by this Court, and the parties are held bound by the same. 14. Consequently, the captioned suit is decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025 executed between the parties. 15. The Registry of this Court is directed to prepare a decree in terms of this order, and it is directed that the Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2025 shall form part of the said decree.

¶28

Refund of Court Fees

¶29

Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that in view of the compromise recorded between the parties and the early disposal of the suit, the plaintiff prays for a refund of the court fee deposited. She states that she will be satisfied with a partial refund.

¶30

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the registry is directed to refund 100% Court Fee in favour of Plaintiff No. 1 within four (4) weeks, in

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

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 15/10/2025 at 12:09:38

¶33

accordance with law. The said direction has been passed having regard to Sections 16 and 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

¶34

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶35

Further dates, if any, stand cancelled.

¶36

The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of the order shall be insisted upon by any authority/entity or litigant.

¶37

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶38

OCTOBER 13, 2025/ rhc / aa

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 15/10/2025 at 12:09:38

Hero Motocorp Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Shiv Kumar Gupta & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hero Motocorp Limited & Anr. v. Mr. Shiv Kumar Gupta & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siyaram Silk Mills Limited Vs Amstead Clothing Co. & Ors.

Chiquita Brands Llc Vs M/S. Raghunath Packers & Ors.

Health & Glow Private Limited Vs Third Eye Brands & Concepts Private Limited & Ors.

Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Ashok Kumar (John Doe)

Anil Sharma Vs Atul Gupta & Ors.

Hdmi Licensing Administrator Inc. Vs M/S Ekkaa Electronics Industries Private Limited and Anr.

Criticalog India Private Ltd. Vs Delta Freight System & Anr.

Glaxo Group Limited Vs Tenx Pharma LLP and Anr.

Khatri Tilpatti Bhandar Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Radha Devi Khatri & Ors.

Chiquita Brands Llc Vs M/S. Raghunath Packers & Ors.

Hero Investcorp Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Ashok Kumar (John Doe)

Tactical Therapeutics, Inc. Vs the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs

M/S. Aquapump Industries & Anr. Vs Ravi Yadav & Anr.

Hero Investcorp Private Limited & Anr. Vs Ashok Kumar Unkown