Hsil Limited v. Munjal Traders & ANR

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 710/2017 & I.A. 12047/2017 HSIL LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Manav Gupta, Advocate with Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Mr. Sahil Garg and Ms. Esha Dutta, Advocates.

versus MUNJAL TRADERS & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Ms. Geeta Verma, Advocate and Ms. Sakshi Bhasin, Advocate with defendant No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 15.01.2018 Today, learned counsel for defendants, on instructions of defendant No.2 who is personally present in Court, states that she has no objection if the present suit is decree in accordance with the prayers (a), (b) and (c) of the plaint. She further undertakes that the defendants shall not misuse the plaintiff‟s trade mark HINDUSTAN VITREOUS or H VITREOUS or HINDWARE and/or any other similar mark that is deceptively similar to the trademark of the plaintiff for any of their products in future Learned counsel for plaintiff states that in view of the aforesaid statement, he does not wish to press for any further reliefs other than costs of Rs.40,000/-. He also prays that the written statement filed by the defendants

be taken off the record and returned to the defendants inasmuch as it contains scandalous allegations against the Local Commissioner. Learned counsel for defendants has no objection to the written statement being returned.

The statements, assurances and undertakings given by the learned counsel for defendants are accepted by this Court and defendants are held bound by the same.

Registry is directed to prepare a decree sheet accordingly. Registry is also directed to issue to an authorised representative of the plaintiff a certificate authorizing it to receive back from the Collector full amount of the Court fee paid by it in the present suit. With the aforesaid observations, present suit and pending application stand disposed of.

MANMOHAN, J JANUARY 15, 2018 js