High Court of DelhiCS(COMM)/318/2023

Jockey International Inc v. M/S Khalsa Accessories & ORS.

2024-04-25Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Anish Dayal15 pages

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 318/2023, I.A. 9634/2023 & I.A. 24568/2023 JOCKEY INTERNATIONAL INC ..... Plaintiff Through:

Mr. Saif Khan, Mr. Prajjwal Kushwaha and Mr. Parveen Thakur, Advs.

versus M/S KHALSA ACCESSORIES & ORS.

..... Defendants Through:

Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Adv. for D-1 to 7.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 25.04.2024 I.A. 24568/2023 (under Order VIII Rule 10, CPC seeking judgment and decree due to parties failing to file the Written Statement) 1.

This application has been filed under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") seeking a decree in view of the fact that none of the defendants have filed their written statements and their right to file was closed by order dated 01st December, 2023. An ex parte ad interim injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff by this Court on 18th May, 2023 in the following terms:

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The facts and circumstances on which the injunction was premised are also narrated in the said order in para 9 - 17, which are provided as under: The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Court has perused the same, as well as, the pleadings and documents on record.

Counsel for defendant Nos.1 to 7 appears through VC and state, on instructions, that the defendants are collectively willing to pay an amount of Rs.2.5 Lacs towards costs and damages to the plaintiff. 5.

Mr. Khan, counsel for the plaintiff, points out to the Local Commissioner's report and to the seizures which were made during the execution of the Commission.

Taking note of these submissions and in view of the following decisions on aspects that need to be taken into account in respect of costs and damages viz. Koninlijke Philips N.V. v. Amazestore, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8198 as also in the decision in Inter Ikea Systems BV v. Sham Murari, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 11221.

In Koninlijke Phillips (supra), this Court has stated as under: "41. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that the rule of thumb that should be followed while granting damages can be summarised in a chart as under:- # Degree of mala fide conduct Proportionate award (i) First-time innocent infringer Injunction (ii) First-time knowing infringer Injunction + Partial Costs The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

(iii) Repeated knowing infringer which causes minor impact to the Plaintiff Injunction + Costs + Partial damages (iv) Repeated knowing infringer which causes major impact to the Plaintiff Injunction + Costs + Compensatory damages.

(v) Infringement which was deliberate and calculated (Gangster/scam/mafia) + wilful contempt of court.

Injunction + Costs + Aggravated damages (Compensatory + additional damages)

42. It is clarified that the above chart is illustrative and is not to be read as a statutory provision. The Courts are free to deviate from the same for good reason."

The said decision was cited with approval also in Puma SE v. Ashok Kumar 2023 SCC OnLine Del 6764.

In Inter Ikea Systems BV (supra), the issue of damages has been dealt with inter alia in para 20 wherein reference to Hindustan Unilever Limited v. Reckitt Benckiser India Limited, ILR (2014) 2 Del 1288 was made. It has been noted that the Courts have upheld the procedure of using rough and ready calculation for award of damages.

In view of these facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate that the defendant Nos.1 to 7 will pay an amount of Rs.2.5 Lacs to counsel for the plaintiff within the next four weeks, and a decree be passed in terms of Prayer contained in paras 46 (a) - (d), which are as under: The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

10.

Decree-sheet be drawn up accordingly.

11.

Considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, early on the suit proceedings, the plaintiff is entitled to 100% refund of the Court Fees. 12.

Registry is directed accordingly.

13.

The goods were sized by the Local Commissioner and deposited in superdari with the defendants.

14.

The said goods be handed over to the Authorized Representative of the plaintiff/company along with their counsel on or before 30th April, 2024. 15.

The plaintiff will be entitled to modify/remove the labels on the said products and has volunteered to donate to an NGO. The same may be donated to Sapna Anandam NGO, B-80, B-Block, Sector 31, Noida, U.P. - 201301 (Registered Address: Flat No. 8086, Pocket D-8, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi110070; Contact details: https://sapnaindia.org/contact-us/). 16.

Suit is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of as being rendered infructuous.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

17.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J APRIL 25, 2024/MK/ig The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.