Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 158 (DEL)

WIN MEDICARE PRIVATE LIMITED v. UNI-PEX PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD

2006-01-20

BADAR DURREZ AHMED

body2006
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed jointly by the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff has instituted this suit for permanent injunction restraining the infringement of registered trademark, copyright, passing off, rendition of accounts, delivery up and damages. During the pendency of the present suit, the plaintiff and the defendant have arrived at a settlement which has been reduced to writing in the form of this application. The terms and conditions of the settlement are set out in detail in the application. ( 2 ) BROADLY speaking, the defendant has acknowledged the plaintiff to be the proprietor of the trademark ?betadine?and ?eczo-BETADINE?as set out in paragraph 3 of the plaint. The defendant has also acknowledged the plaintiff to be the owner of the copyright in the product packaging of the plaintiff s betadine Ointment packaging under Copyright Registration No. A-53290/96 as described in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the plaint. In view of these acknowledgments, the defendant has undertaken to discontinue from manufacturing, marketing, selling, advertising or in any way dealing in pharmaceutical preparations in cartons and tubes bearing the trademark ?becadine? or any other trademark which is deceptively similar to the plaintiff s trademark ?betadine? so as to amount to infringement of trademark registration No. 425874 and 548827 in Class-5. The defendant has also undertaken to discontinue from manufacturing, marketing, selling and advertising or in any way dealing in pharmaceutical preparations in cartons and tubes bearing an identical or deceptively similar get up, lay out and colour combination or any other way which is a substantial reproduction or a colourable imitation of the plaintiff s packaging of the ?betadine Povidonelodine Ointment USP?as described in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the plaint. The other undertakings are contained in the application. The defendant has also stated that it does not have in its possession any bottles, labels, stationery articles, blocks dies and any other material bearing the impugned trademark ?becadine? and the arrangement of features, colour combination and lay out, as the same have been destroyed. The defendant has also stated that the last batch of the impugned product was manufactured in the month of December, 2004 and that no further manufacture of the impugned product has taken place. and the arrangement of features, colour combination and lay out, as the same have been destroyed. The defendant has also stated that the last batch of the impugned product was manufactured in the month of December, 2004 and that no further manufacture of the impugned product has taken place. ( 3 ) IN view of these undertakings and statements, the plaintiff has agreed to give up its claim for rendition of accounts and damages. The plaintiff and the defendant, therefore, prayed by way of this application that the suit be decreed in terms of paragraph 18 (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of the plaint as also incorporating the terms of the compromise therein. ( 4 ) I have heard the counsel for the parties and have examined the terms of the settlement which have been reduced to writing in the form of the present application. The application is signed on behalf of the plaintiff by Mr Rajiv behl who is the constituted attorney of the plaintiff company. It has been signed on behalf of the defendant by Mr Jagdish Bansal, who is a Director of the defendant company and is duly authorised and competent to sign on behalf of the defendant company. The counsel for the parties have also signed this application. Affidavits in support of this application have been given by the said Mr Rajiv Behl and Mr Jagdish Bansal. The application be exhibited as exhibit-C-1. Upon examining the terms of the settlement as stated in the application, I find that the agreement arrived at between the parties and reduced to writing as aforesaid is lawful. Accordingly, the settlement is taken on record and the suit is decreed in terms of paragraph 18 (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of the plaint and in terms of the settlement arrived at. The decree sheet be prepared accordingly. This application (Exhibit-C-1) shall form part of the decree. No order as to costs. .