Mankind Pharma Limited v. Manking Pharmaceutical Private Limited & ANR.

$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 337/2024 & I.As. 9226/2024, 9231/2024, 38800/2024 MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through:

Mr. Ankur Sangal, Mr. Ankit Arvind, Mr. Shashwat Rakshit and Ms. Nidhi Pathak, Advocates.

versus MANKING PHARMACEUTICAL PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. .....Defendants Through:

Defendant No. 2 in person through VC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

O R D E R

% 27.03.2026 1.

This suit is instituted on behalf of the Plaintiff seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants and all others acting on their behalf from selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in any goods or services under the impugned marks 'MANKING'/ and/or any other trademark identical or deceptively similar to Plaintiff's registered 'MANKIND' trademarks as enumerated in paragraph 13 of the plaint, amounting to infringement and passing off, amongst other reliefs. 2.

During the pendency of the suit, parties have amicably resolved and settled their disputes and terms of settlement are as follows:- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

"a. Defendants acknowledge that Plaintiff is the sole and exclusive proprietor of the trademarks MANKIND/ and has goodwill and reputation in the said trademarks;

b. Defendants agree and undertake that they will not use the trademark/trade name/corporate name 'MANKING'/ or any other trademark/trade name as may be identical to or deceptively similar with Plaintiff's trademark 'MANKIND' or logo ;

c. Defendants confirm that they have written to Registrar of Companies stating that they have closed the company MANKING PHARMACEUTICAL PRIVATE LIMITED and have attached the relevant application(s) made before relevant authorities and shall not use any trade name/corporate name consisting of Plaintiff's registered trademarks; d. Defendants confirm that they have withdrawn the below mentioned trademark applications or any other trademark application(s)/registration(s) which are identical or deceptively similar to Plaintiff's trademarks "MANKIND"/ and have shared withdrawal letters with the Plaintiff;

Trade Mark Application No.

Date of Application 3704446 16/12/2017 3321634 27/07/2016 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3174636 02/02/2016 e. Defendants undertake to take steps to transfer the domain name https://manking.in/ to the Plaintiff within 7 days from the date of settlement being recorded by the Court;

f. Defendants confirm that they have taken down their listings under the trademark/trade name "MANKING"/ from their social media pages, website and third-party websites of their proprietors, partners or directors, as the case may be, their principal officers, distributors, licensees and agents and all others acting for and on behalf of the Defendants; g. Defendants undertake to hand over all the infringing products available with the Defendants under the trademark/trade name "MANKING"/ in their possession to Plaintiff's representative within a period of 7 days from date of recording the settlement by the Court;

h. In view of above terms and conditions, the present suit be decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of the Plaint; i. Subject to the continued satisfaction of the terms in the present application and conditions agreed and undertaken by the Defendants, Plaintiff agrees not to press reliefs of damages, rendition of accounts and costs incurred in the present proceedings."

3.

Mr. Ram Dayal Meena, Defendant No. 2 has joined the Court proceedings virtually and agrees that the parties have settled the matter amicably out of their own free will and suit be decreed accordingly. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4.

Court has perused the terms of the settlement and finds the same to be lawful. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of the plaint read with the settlement between the parties, terms of which shall form part of decree and bind the parties thereto. 5.

Registry is directed to draw up the decree sheet. 6.

Suit is disposed of along with pending applications. 7.

Plaintiff is held entitled to refund of entire court fees in accordance with the Court Fees Act, 1870.

JYOTI SINGH, J MARCH 27, 2026 S.Sharma The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.