Monsanto Technology Llc & Anr vs S.K. Jindal & Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 3307 Del

$~43.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CS(OS) 1820/2012
      MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC & ANR           ..... Plaintiffs
                   Through: Ms. Nancy Roy, Advocate

                           versus

      S.K. JINDAL & ORS                            ..... Defendants
                      Through: Mr. Kunal Madan, Advocate with
                      Mr. Milan Malhotra, Advocate alongwith
                      Mr. Mahipal, AR of the defendant No.2 and 3.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                           ORDER

% 23.04.2015

1. On the last date of hearing, counsels for the parties had sought

two weeks' time to file a compromise application. The said application

has not been filed. However, counsels for the parties jointly state that

the defendant No.1 has already expired and the defendants No.2 and

3 are willing to suffer a decree in terms of prayer clauses 39(i), (ii)

and (iii) of the plaint.

2. Learned counsel for the defendants No.2 & 3 states on

instructions from Mr. Mahipal, authorised representative of the

defendants No.2 and 3 that they do not have any objection if the suit

is decreed in terms of prayer clauses 39(i), (ii) and (iii).

3. Counsel for the parties further state that the defendants No.2

and 3 have agreed to pay litigation costs of `50,000/- to the plaintiff.

A cheque for the said amount is handed over to the counsel for the

plaintiffs with an assurance that the same shall be duly encashed.

4. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present suit is decreed

in terms of prayer clauses 39(i), (ii) and (iii). Counsel for the plaintiff

gives up the reliefs in prayer clauses 39 (iv), (v) and (vi).

5. No further orders are required to be passed in the present suit,

which is accordingly disposed of while leaving the parties to bear their

own costs.

HIMA KOHLI, J

APRIL 23, 2015 rkb