Skol Breweries Ltd. vs D.D.Food Products
2015 Latest Caselaw 5183 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+           Execution Petition No.2/2007 & EAs No.106/2013 &
            449/2014

                                                   Decided on : 20.07.2015
IN THE MATTER OF:
SKOL BREWERIES LTD.                                ..... Decree Holder
                        Through : Ms. Nancy Roy, Advocate

                        versus

D.D.FOOD PRODUCTS                                  ..... Judgment Debtor
                        Through : Mr. Dhruva Bhagat and
                        Ms.Ashna Bhalla, Advocate

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

                    ORDER

% 20.07.2015

EA No.697/2015(u/O XXIII R 3 CPC)

1. The Decree Holder has filed the present petition praying inter alia for

execution of the consent judgment and decree dated 5.4.2006, passed in

CS(OS) No.370/2005. As per the Decree Holder, despite having given

undertakings to the court, the Judgment Debtor failed to comply with the

terms of settlement and the Decree Holder was constrained to file the

present petition.

2. Notice was issued in the present petition on 4.1.2007, whereafter

appearance was entered by the Judgment Debtor and during the pendency

of the present petition, a joint application has been filed by the Decree

Holder and the Judgment Debtor, wherein Mr.Inderjeet Dhingra, proprietor

of the defendant firm has given a series of undertakings to the court,

acknowledging the absolute ownership and right of the Decree Holder in

and to the trademarks, "HAYWARDS", "HAYWARDS 5000" and the

distinctive HAYWARDS label and/or the distinctive HAYWARDS 5000 soda

bottle shape. The Judgment Debtor has also acknowledged the trademark,

"5000" and the distinctive HAYWARDS 5000 soda bottle shape associated

with the products of the Decree Holder. Further, the Judgment Debtor has

agreed that he would pay liquidated damages to the tune of `10,00,000/-

to the Decree Holder in the event of violating the terms of the settlement.

In consideration of the said undertakings, the Decree Holder has agreed

not to proceed further with the execution petition.

3. Counsels for the parties state that the undertakings of the Judgment

Debtor be taken on record and the petition be disposed of.

4. The court has perused the application that has been signed by

Mr.Inderjeet Dhingra, proprietor of the Judgment Debtor firm and the

constituted attorney of the Decree Holder and their respective counsels

and the same is supported by the affidavits of the signatories to the

application.

5. In view of the terms and conditions of the settlement recorded in

the present application and the undertakings given by the Mr.Inderjeet

Dhingra, proprietor of the Judgment Debtor firm, the present petition is

disposed of. Mr.Inderjeet Dhingra, proprietor of the Judgment Debtor firm

shall remain bound by the undertakings recorded in the present

application, failing which, he has been apprised of the adverse

consequences spelt out in para 4 of the application.

6. The application is allowed and disposed of. The present petition is

disposed of, along with pending applications.

(HIMA KOHLI) JUDGE JULY 20, 2015 mk