INTERNATIONAL FOODSTUFFS CO. LLC vs VIJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND PAWAN KUMAR AND ANR.

$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 84/2022
INTERNATIONAL FOODSTUFFS CO. LLC ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mohit Singh, Adv.

versus

VIJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND PAWAN KUMAR AND ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Adv.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R (O R A L)
% 06.12.2023

1. The disputes between the parties stand settled with the intervention of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

2. The settlement agreement dated 11 September 2023 is on record.

3. The terms of settlement read thus:
“2. The Respondent hereby agrees and admits that

a) The Petitioner is the true owner, lawful and legitimate user and proprietor of the trademark “ALLEGRO” in different jurisdictions outside India in respect of edible oils (except Soyabean Oil), fats, ghee, margarine, butter, soup, products, milk and dairy products, flavoured milk, meat, fish, poultry and game, meat extracts, preserved, toppings of all kinds and descriptions including non-dairy toppings, whipping cream, jellies, jams, compotes (hereinafter referred as the Petitioner’s Trademarks).
b) The Respondent acknowledges proprietary rights of the Petitioner in the said trademark in India for said goods

c) The Petitioner has been using the trademark. “ALLEGRO”, in, different jurisdictions outside and in India for several years in respect, of their said goods on cartons, packing material etc. and that the Petitioner enjoys immense goodwill therein.

3 The Petitioner further agrees that it shall use trademark “ALLEGRO” to cover protection for edible oils (except Soyabean Oil), fats, ghee, margarine, butter, soup products, milk and dairy products, flavoured milk, meat, fish, poultry and game, meat extracts, preserved, toppings of all kinds and descriptions including non-dairy toppings, whipping cream, jellies, jams, compotes, which are being marketed in India by the Petitioner and not otherwise.

4 The Petitioner further agrees that it shall never use and/or register trade mark ALLEGRO for Soya bari/chunks/nuggets, Soya granules/ chura, Soya bari mini, Soya flour, Instant soya drink powder, Soya Milk Drinks, Soya protein isolate, powder, Soya paneer/tofu, Instant wheat Dalia, Popcorn maize, Macaroni and Noodles in jurisdictions in India nor shall it object to use and registration of Respondent’s trademark “ALLEGRO” for said Products in jurisdiction in India.

5 Similarly, Respondent will not use the trademark ALLEGRO for the said products of the petitioner in any manner. In case if Petitioner wants to use Allegro mark in future for any other products, it can request for NOC from the respondent and the respondent will provide such NOC without any cost.

6 The Petitioner further agrees that it shall honor and recognize all registrations of Trademarks already done in India in the name of Respondent and shall not seek cancellation of any registration of trade mark ALLEGRO already registered in the name of Respondent in India. Likewise, the Respondent shall honor and recognize all registrations of trademarks already done in India in the name of Petitioner and shall not seek to oppose or cancel any registration of trade mark of the Defendant in India. Provided that the Petitioner shall withdraw its existing application/s for the trademark ALLEGRO word per se in India and that all the Future applications will be filed and registrations will be obtained by the Petitioner in accordance with the terms of this agreement and as set forth above.

7 Both Parties further agree to withdraw all suits, oppositions/ rectification applications filed by them before any forum / judicial body / court/ authority in India or abroad and undertake not to file here-after any opposition, rectification application before any forum / judicial body / court / authority in India or abroad if the same is in accordance with the present Settlement Agreement.

8 That the parties further undertake to get the C.O. (COMM. IPD-TM) 84/2022 be disposed off in terms of the present Settlement Agreement and the parties further undertake that they are bound by this Settlement Agreement and to abide by the terms and conditions set out in the agreement and not to dispute the same hereinafter in future.

4. The parties are represented by learned Counsel who undertake on behalf of their respective clients to remain bound by the terms of settlement.

5. The Court has perused the terms of settlement and find them to be lawful and in order.

6. As such, nothing survives for adjudication in the present petition.

7. The petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid settlement agreement. The parties shall remain bound by the terms of settlement as aforesaid.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
DECEMBER 6, 2023
dsn

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 84/2022 Page 1 of 3