Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited v. Dr Manjot Marwah & ORS.

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 325/2025 & I.A. 9168/2025 I.A. 16069/2025 I.A. 16070/2025 I.A. 27027/2025 RECKITT BENCKISER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through:

Ms. Nancy Roy, Adv. (Through VC) versus DR MANJOT MARWAH & ORS.

.....Defendants Through:

Mr. Ramandeep Singh, Adv. for D-1 (Through VC)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 28.11.2025 I.A. 27027/2025(under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC)` 1.

This is an application filed by the plaintiff and defendant no. 1 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') for bringing on record the settlement arrived between the parties. 2.

The application is duly signed by the parties and supported through affidavits.

3.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that defendant no. 1 has already complied with all the obligations assumed by her under the terms of the settlement.

4.

Learned counsel for defendant no. 1 states that defendant no. 1 undertakes to remain in full compliance with the aforesaid terms and conditions.

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

5.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the plaintiffs and the defendant no. 1 and perused the settlement terms and is satisfied that the same is lawful. The settlement terms agreed upon filed along with the captioned application is marked as Exhibit-C. 6.

This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties as contained in the aforesaid Settlement terms satisfies the requirements of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and therefore, there is no impediment in decreeing the suit in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 7.

Consequently, the captioned suit is decreed in terms of the Joint Settlement terms executed between the parties. 8.

The registry is directed to draw up a decree in terms this order and the Joint Settlement terms shall form part of the decree. Defendant no. 3 9.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that the suit may be disposed of vis-à-vis defendant no. 3 in terms of the injunction order dated 08.04.2025.

10.

The submission of the plaintiff is taken on record. 11.

This Court notes that defendant no. 3 was injuncted vide order dated 08.04.2025 and there has been no appearance on behalf of defendant no. 3 thereafter seeking variation or modification of the injunction order. Defendant No. 3 was proceeded ex-parte on 08.04.2025. It is therefore apparent that Defendant no. 3 does not contest the said injunction order. 12.

This Court finds no purpose in continuing the suit qua defendant no.

3. It is directed that the defendant no. 3 shall remain bound by the statement made in the e-mail dated 06.04.2025 and the injunction order dated 08.04.2025. The suit qua defendant no. 3 stands disposed of in terms thereof. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

13.

The suit qua remaining defendant nos. 2, 4 and 5 already stands disposed of vide decree dated 06.05.2025 and order dated 03.11.2025 respectively.

14.

All pending applications stand disposed of.

15.

Future dates, if any, stand cancelled.

16.

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 order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 28, 2025/hp The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.