New Balance Athletics Inc. Vs Ashok Kumar and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

New Balance Athletics Inc. Vs Ashok Kumar and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Decree of permanent injunction in favour of plaintiff against defendants in terms of prayer clauses 65(a), 65(b), 65(c) and 65(e); defendant no. 1 to pay Rs. 75,000 towards damages and costs in three equal monthly instalments beginning 15th March, 2025; direction freezing defendant no. 1's bank account(s) vacated; certificate of refund of entire court fees issued in favour of Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys under Section 16, Court Fees Act, 1870.

Ratio / Principle

On defendant no. 1's offer to pay Rs. 75,000 towards damages/costs and non-objecting to injunctive relief, a decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of prayer clauses 65(a), 65(b), 65(c) and 65(e).

Key takeaways

Defendant no. 1 shall pay Rs. 75,000 towards damages and costs, through counsel for the plaintiff Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys.ratio¶15
The sum of Rs. 75,000/- shall be paid by defendant no. 1 in three (3) equal monthly instalments, beginning from 15th March, 2025.ratio¶16
In view of the settlement, the direction in the order dated 20th February, 2023 for freezing of the bank account(s) of defendant no. 1 (linked to the specified UPI ID) stands vacated.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Bansal, J.), by consent/settlement at the initial stage: (i) decree of permanent injunction passed in favour of New Balance Athletics Inc. and against the defendants in terms of prayer clauses 65(a), 65(b), 65(c) and 65(e); (ii) defendant no. 1 to pay Rs. 75,000/- towards damages and costs through plaintiff's counsel Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys, in three equal monthly instalments beginning 15.03.2025; (iii) direction in the order dated 20.02.2023 freezing defendant no. 1's bank account(s) linked to UPI AAMIR SOHAIL-8233223409@ybl-SBIN0003628-339922200536 vacated; (iv) suit decreed, pending application disposed of; (v) Registry to issue certificate of refund of entire court fees under Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

$~24

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CS(COMM) 92/2023 & I.A. 41352/2024

NEW BALANCE ATHLETICS INC. .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Urfee Roomi, Ms. Janaki Arun, Mr. Ritesh Kumar & Mr. Arpit Singhal, Advocates.

versus

AMIR SOHAIL AND ANR. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Arnav Goyal & Ms. Bhumika Kukreja, Advocates for D-1 with defendant in-person. Mr. Rishabh Dev Mishra, Advocate for D-4.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R % 06.03.2025

Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 27^th February, 2025, the counsel for defendant no. 1, on instruction from defendant no. 1, who is appearing through video-conferencing, submits that his client is willing to pay a sum of ₹75,000/-, towards damages/ costs to the plaintiff.

He further submits that he does not object to a decree of permanent injunction being passed, in favour of the plaintiff.

In view of the above, a decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants, in terms of prayer clauses 65(a), 65(b), 65(c) and 65(e).

In addition, defendant no. 1 shall pay a sum of ₹75,000 towards

Page 1 of 2

CS(COMM) 92/2023

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 11/03/2025 at 12:03:05

damages and costs, through counsel for the plaintiff Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys.

The aforesaid amount of ₹75,000/- shall be paid in three (3) equal monthly instalments, beginning from 15^th March, 2025.

In view of the aforesaid, the direction in the order dated 20^th February, 2023 for freezing of the bank account(s) of defendant no. 1, linked to UPIAAMIR SOHAIL-8233223409@ybl-SBIN0003628-339922200536, stands vacated.

Suit is decreed in the aforesaid terms.

Let a decree sheet be drawn up.

Pending application also stands disposed of.

In view of the fact that the matter has been settled at the initial stage, the Registry is directed to issue a certificate of refund of the entire court fees in favour of the plaintiffs’ counsel, i.e., Sujata Chaudhri IP Attorneys, in terms of Section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

AMIT BANSAL, J

MARCH 6, 2025 at

Page 2 of 2

CS(COMM) 92/2023

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 11/03/2025 at 12:03:05