Disposed

Ashok Kumar Jain v. Kumar Food Industries Ltd.

Delhi HC2 Sept 2026RFA(COMM)/592/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of an appeal and pending applications based on a settlement agreement between the parties. The appellant agreed to pay Rs. 2.5 lakhs and withdraw a Class-30 trademark application within one week.

What did the court decide?

Appeal and pending applications disposed of; appellant to pay Rs. 2.5 lakhs in three instalments and withdraw trademark application within one week.

Ashok Kumar Jain Vs Kumar Food Industries Ltd. — Intellectual Property | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~25

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CNR No. DLHC010409282026

¶4

- RFA(COMM) 592/2026 CM APPL. 58728/2026 CM APPL. 58729/2026 CM APPL. 58730/2026

¶5

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶6

.....APPELLANT Through: Mr. Faiyaz Hasan, Mohd Sajid and Mohd Zaid Akhtar, Advs. along with appellant. versus

¶7

KUMAR FOOD INDUSTRIES LTD

¶8

.....RESPONDENT Through: Mr. Neeraj Grover, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Sanandika Pratap Singh, Advs.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

¶11

O R D E R % 02.09.2026

¶12

Yesterday, when the appeal was listed, we passed the following

¶13

order:-

¶14

“6. At the outset learned counsel for the appellant submits that he shall be challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 16.05.2026 in CS (COMM) 842/2024 only to the extent that the suit of the respondent herein has also been decreed for damages of Rs. 5 lakhs against the appellant herein.

¶15

7. In other words, he states that he shall not contest the finding and the conclusion drawn by the learned

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 05/09/2026 at 10:28:01

¶18

District Judge with regard to the impugned mark MAHA SHAKTI BHOG. The submission is taken on record.

¶19

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶20

9. Mr. Neeraj Grover, learned senior counsel for the respondent states that though no evidence was placed for quantifying the damages at Rs. 5 lakhs, even otherwise, sufficient documents were filed on the record of the learned District Judge to show costs incurred by the respondent herein while pursuing the litigation before the learned District Judge in the suit wherein the impugned judgment and decree has been passed. He requests for a day’s adjournment to place the same on record, the said documents.

¶21

10. At his request, re-notify tomorrow i.e., 02.09.2026.”

¶22

Today, learned counsel for the parties states that the parties have decided to finally settle the dispute on the following conditions:-

¶23

i. That the appellant shall pay the respondent an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- as full and final settlement in lieu of Rs. 5,00,000/- and cost as awarded.

¶24

ii. That the appellant shall withdraw the application no. 5757242 dated 09.01.2023 in Class-30 for registration of trademark “Maha Shakti Bhog” within one week from today by filing an appropriate application before the Trademark Registry. A copy of the same shall be given to the respondent through the counsel.

¶25

Mr. Faiyaz Hasan, learned counsel for the appellant states that the amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- shall be paid to the respondent in three equal instalments within a period of three months as an outer limit.

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 05/09/2026 at 10:28:01

¶28

We take on record the undertaking given by the appellant, who is present in person and also the submission of Mr. Neeraj Grover, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent that the parties shall be bound by the aforesaid terms, as agreed to between them.

¶29

In terms of the above, the appeal and the pending applications are disposed of.

¶30

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶31

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶32

SEPTEMBER 2, 2026 /sr

¶33

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 05/09/2026 at 10:28:01

Ashok Kumar Jain v. Kumar Food Industries Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Jain v. Kumar Food Industries Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chirag Gupta Proprietor of Kent Industries through Attorney Sh. Raj Kumar Sharma Vs the Red Fox Cables and Enterprises through Its Proprietor Sh. Mehul Mamgain

Shopping Series & Anr. Vs M/S. Shopper Gallery & Ors.

Taruna Goyal Vs Govind Ram Gupta

Crown Enterprises Vs Radha Kasera

Nitya Vaishnavi Singh Vs Vee Excel Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Radha Kishan Gobind Ram Ltd. Vs M/S Swift Offset Pvt. Ltd.

Satish Kumar Narula Vs Shri Deepak Kumar and Anr.

Satish Kumar Narula Vs Smt.Vandana Gupta and Anr.