High Court of DelhiCS(COMM)/585/2021

Sandvik Intellectual Property Ab & ANR. v. Mr. Kalyan Singh & ORS.

2024-05-16Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Anish Dayal6 pages

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 585/2021 & I.A. 20916/2023 SANDVIK INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AB & ANR. .... Plaintiffs Through:

Mr. Siddhant Chamola and Ms.

Pallavi Bhatnagar, Advs.

versus MR. KALYAN SINGH & ORS.

..... Defendants Through:

Mr. Neeraj Gogia, Mr. Manu Prabhakar and Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advs. for D-1 & 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 16.05.2024 I.A. 20916/2023 1.

This application has been filed seeking summary judgment under Order XIII-A Rules 3 and 6(1)(a) read with Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") in favour of plaintiff. 2.

An ex parte ad interim injunction was passed in favour of plaintiff on 22nd November, 2021 restraining inter alia the defendants in dealing with impugned products manufactured by the defendants or in any manner dealing with distributor plates, rotor tip holders and turbo tips compatible with the SANDVIK VSI crushers or any other products which infringe the plaintiff's suit patents IN 248934, IN 219520 and IN 326138. Defendants thereafter, did not appear before this Court despite advance notice. Defendants' right to file written statement was closed by order dated 05th July, 2022 and thereafter, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

they were proceeded ex parte by order dated 25th August, 2022. The injunction order dated 22nd November, 2021 was made absolute. 3.

Pursuant thereto, I.A. 2078/2023 was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC which was heard by this Court on 31st January, 2024. In terms of the reasons given in the said order, the contempt proceedings were not pressed by plaintiff and directions were given to defendant to deposit costs for Rs.1 Lac within four weeks before the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

Counsel for defendants has produced a receipt for the said deposit today. The same may be placed on record.

In these circumstances, counsel for plaintiff seeks a decree of injunction in their favour, to which counsel for defendants has no objection, as stated on instructions.

The background facts in this matter are narrated in the order dated 22nd November, 2021 in paras 10 - 16, which are not being repeated herein and are extracted as under:

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

It is also informed by counsel for the plaintiff that patents IN 248934 and IN 219520 have since expired and the injunction is sought only in relation to IN 326138.

Counsel for plaintiff presses for costs as well as legal fee and the amount which was incurred for purchasing products in order to press their contempt. Counsel for defendants refutes the same and states that they have agreed to the injunction despite having put forward their submissions on the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

last date, relating to the facts and circumstances of the matter. 9.

The Court has perused the respective submissions of the parties which are recoded in the order dated 31st January, 2024. In particular para 10, it is recorded that a reply was filed by defendants to the application, putting forward their response. The Court had already directed defendant No.1 to deposit costs of Rs.1 Lac to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, which has since been deposited.

10.

In these circumstances, since the matter has been disposed of at a summary stage upon a concession on injunction by the defendant, the plaintiff's request for costs of Rs.5 Lacs is not accepted. 11.

In view of the same, decree is passed in terms of Prayer in para 119(i) of Plaint, which is as under:

"A decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants themselves or trading as another entity, their partners, related parties, servants, employees, officers, agents, stockists, distributors, dealers and all others acting for and on their behalf from making, using, selling, distributing, advertising, offering for sale, selling, importing, and in any other manner, directly or indirectly, commercializing or dealing in any product that infringes the subject matter of Indian Patent No.326138."

12.

Suit is accordingly, disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous.

13.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MAY 16, 2024/MK/na The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.