INTER IKEA SYSTEMS BV v. BR RETAIL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR.

Delhi High Court · 01 Jun 2023 · 2023:DHC:4083
C. Hari Shankar
CS(COMM) 882/2022
2023:DHC:4083
civil appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court decreed a trademark infringement suit in terms of a lawful settlement wherein the defendants acknowledged the plaintiff's trademark ownership and agreed to cease use of infringing marks.

Full Text
Translation output
CS(COMM) 882/2022
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CS(COMM) 882/2022
INTER IKEA SYSTEMS BV ..... Plaintiff
Through: Ms. Tanya Varma, Ms. Archita Nigam and Ms. Parkhi Rai, Advs.
VERSUS
BR RETAIL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. ..... Defendants
Through: Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR O R D E R (O R A L)
01.06.2023
I.A.11196/2023 (under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC)
JUDGMENT

1. The disputes between the parties stand settled and the present application has been jointly filed by them under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC praying that the suit be decreed in terms of the said settlement. The terms of the settlement read thus: “(a) The Defendants acknowledge that the Plaintiff is the owner of the trademark „IKEA‟ and under the Trademarks Act, 1999 as well as under common law as elaborated in the Plaint. The details of the Plaintiffs trademarks registered in India under various classes is detailed in paragraph 14 of the Plaint and a list of the Plaintiffs trademark registrations overseas are also filed along with the plaint. (b) The Defendants undertake that they will not use the trademarks TIKEA/ any other marks which are identical/deceptively similar to those of the Plaintiffs IKEA trademarks in relation to their products as mentioned in the Plaint in any manner whatsoever.

(c) That Defendant No. 2 vide letters dated 16.02.2023 filed on

21.02.2023 have filed applications before the Trade Marks Registry to withdraw its trademark applications for the mark under application number 551902[8] and 551903[3] in class 7 and 9 respectively and for the mark TIKEYA (word) under application number 551902[7] and 5519030 in Class 7 and 9 respectively and have provided proof thereof to the Plaintiff.

(d) The Defendants undertake that the Defendants will in the future not file any trademark application for TIKEA/ and/or any other mark that is identical or deceptively similar to that of the Plaintiff as detailed in the Plaint. (e) The Defendants undertake to pay costs to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- to the Plaintiff towards settlement in the matter. (f) The Defendants undertake that they will remove all the references of the TIKEA/ from the website www.brretails.com and www.tikea.in as also all third-party websites within 7 days of the execution of the present settlement application. (g) The Defendants undertake that the website www.tikea.in will remain inactive and that they will transfer the domain name www.tikea.in in favour of the Plaintiff within 15 days of the execution of this settlement application. (h) The Defendants undertake to destroy all infringing advertising material, visiting cards, labels, stationery, banners, signages, pamphlets, brochures, and all other business papers and materials bearing the trademark TIKEA/ within 7 days of the execution of the present settlement application;

(i) The Defendant undertakes not to commit any breach of the undertakings in this memorandum of compromise in future in any manner whatsoever. (j) Subject to the aforementioned paragraphs, the Defendants undertake that as on the date of execution of the present application, they are not in violation of the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court on 20th December 2022 in any manner whatsoever; (k) The aforesaid undertakings have been given by Mr. Balvinder Singh for Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2 herein, and this undertaking will bind them and all those acting through them and on their behalf.”

2. In view of the aforesaid terms of settlement, no dispute survives for consideration in the present suit. Learned Counsel are present on behalf of their respective clients. They undertake on their behalf to remain bound by the terms of settlement.

3. The Court has perused the terms of settlement and find them to be lawful and enforceable.

4. As such, the suit stands decreed in terms of the aforesaid terms of settlement arrived at between the parties by which the parties shall remain bound.

5. The plaintiff would be entitled to refund of court fees, if any, deposited by it.

6. The next date of hearing fixed in the matter stands cancelled.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J JUNE 1, 2023