Shoppers Stop Ltd vs Shoppers Shop
2015 Latest Caselaw 7439 Del

$~37
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CS(OS) 1954/2015
       SHOPPERS STOP LTD                          ..... Plaintiff
                     Through : Mr. Ankit Rustogi, Advocate

                        versus

       SHOPPERS SHOP                                ..... Defendant
                        Through : Mr. Jayant Kumar, Advocate

     CORAM:
     HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                   ORDER

% 29.09.2015 IA No.20616/2015 (by the plaintiff u/Sec.151 CPC)

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff stating

inter alia that during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties

were referred to mediation and pursuant thereto, they have been able

to arrive at a settlement as recorded in the Settlement Agreement

dated 8.9.2015, which has been placed on record. The terms and

conditions of the settlement have been recorded in para 5 of the

Settlement Agreement dated 8.9.2015.

2. Counsels for the parties state that in terms of the settlement

arrived at between the parties, the defendant has acknowledged the

fact that the plaintiff is the sole and absolute owner of the

trademark/trade name "SHOPPERS STOP" and the "SS LOGO" and it

shall refrain from using the same. Further, the defendant has agreed

to pay a sum of Rs.6.00 lacs to the plaintiff in full and final settlement

of all its claims and a draft of the said amount has already been

handed over to the plaintiff, a copy whereof is enclosed with the

present application.

3. Counsel for the defendant states that the defendant has agreed

to use the trade name "FILOSPHOPE" in the manner reflected at page

21 enclosed with the application. He adds that the parties had

agreed that the defendant will remove the labels from each of their

products in the presence of the representative of the plaintiff, on or

before 11.9.2015. However, none had turned up on behalf of the

plaintiff on the said date. As a result, as agreed, the defendant had

taken steps on its own to remove the tags and still photographs of the

labels detached have been forwarded to the plaintiff, which fact is

confirmed by the counsel for the plaintiff.

4. Counsels for the parties jointly state that the suit may be

decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

5. The Court has perused the application as also the Settlement

Agreement dated 8.9.2015. The same has been signed by the

constituted attorney of the plaintiff and the sole proprietor of the

defendant and by their respective counsels, as also by the learned

Mediator.

6. As the counsels for the plaintiff and the defendants jointly state

that they have arrived at the aforesaid settlement of their own free

will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any

quarters, there appears no legal impediment in accepting the

settlement. The Settlement Agreement dated 08.09.2015 is taken on

record and the parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions

of the said settlement.

7. The suit is decreed, while leaving the parties to bear their own

expenses. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.

8. The date fixed in the case 4th November, 2015 stands canceeled.

IA No. 20617/2015 (by the plaintiff u/Sec. 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870)

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiff stating

inter alia that in view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a

settlement through court annexed mediation, prior to the stage of

pleadings being completed in the suit, the plaintiff is entitled to claim

refund of the court fees in terms of Section 16 of the Court Fees Act.

2. In view of the averments made in the application, the same is

allowed. Registry is directed to issue a certificate in favour of the

plaintiff for refund of the court fees under Section 16 of the Court Fees

Act.

3. The application is disposed of.

4. File be consigned to the record room.

HIMA KOHLI, J SEPTEMBER 29, 2015 sk/rkb