Verizon Trademark Services Llc & ORS. v. Aerosylt Ventures Private Limited & ANR.

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 785/2024 & I.A. 21233/2025 VERIZON TRADEMARK SERVICES LLC & ORS.

.....Plaintiff Through:

Mr.

Shivang Sharma, Advocate (through VC) versus AEROSYLT VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.

.....Defendants Through:

Mr. Punit Vinay, Mr. Prashant Bhati, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

O R D E R

% 29.08.2025 I.A. 21233/2025 (Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC) 1.

The present application has been filed jointly by the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking disposal of the suit in terms of the Settlement arrived at between the parties. 2.

The underlying suit has been filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendants seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of Trademark, passing off etc.

3.

Learned counsel for the parties' state that the Plaintiff and the Defendants decided to settle their dispute amicably and to avoid any further litigation.

3.1.

They state that the terms of the settlement are more specifically recorded in paragraph '2' of the captioned application. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3.2.

They state that the suit may be decreed and disposed of in terms of the captioned application.

3.3.

They state that as pleaded in the captioned application at paragraph '2 (i)' the suit may be decreed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in terms of the settlement recorded in paragraph 2, 3 and 4 of the captioned application.

3.4.

They state that agreed damages of Rs. 2,00,000/- stands paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs and there is no further executory obligation which is to be performed by the parties.

4.

This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties as contained in the captioned application satisfies the requirement of the Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC; the agreement is lawful and therefore, this Court does not find any impediment in disposing of the underlying suit in terms of the aforenoted settlement.

5.

The statement and undertakings given by the learned counsel for the parties are accepted by this Court and the parties are held bound by the same.

6.

Consequently, the captioned suit is hereby decreed in terms of the conditions agreed between the parties as recorded in the captioned application.

7.

The Registry of this Court is directed to draw a decree in terms of this order. The settlement terms set out in the captioned application shall also form part of the decree.

Refund of Court Fee 8.

The Plaintiff has also requested for refund of court fees. 9.

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the registry is directed to refund The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

50% Court Fee in favour of Plaintiff No.3 within four (4) weeks, in accordance with law. The said direction has been passed having regard to Section 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870 as amended for the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

10.

Interim orders, if any, stand merged into the final decree. 11.

Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of. 12.

All future dates stand cancelled.

13.

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 AUGUST 29, 2025/mt/sk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.