Ms. Aastha Sharma, Mr. Armaan Bhardwaj, Advocates v. MADNI OIL CENTER

Page 1 of 4$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CS(COMM) 263/2023 HERO INVESTCORP PVT LTD AND ANR .....Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Aastha Sharma, Mr. Armaan Bhardwaj, Advocates versus MADNI OIL CENTER .....Defendant Through: Mr. Ryan Singh, Advocate CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAO R D E R% 22.08.20251.The present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademarks, passing off, rendition of account, damages, declaration of well-known mark of the Plaintiffs i.e., ‘HERO’ by Defendant. 2.This Court vide Order dated 04.04.2025 recorded the submission of the parties that they are willing to explore the possibility of settlement. The Court, on the basis of the said joint request made by the parties, referred the parties to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (‘Mediation Centre’). The mediation has resulted in successful settlement of disputes. 3.Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 executed between the parties before the Mediation Centre has been received. 4.Learned counsel for the parties jointly state that the suit may be decreed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. Learned This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 2 of 4counsels for the parties states that parties undertake to remain bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. 5.It is agreed in the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 that the Defendant recognizes and acknowledges the Plaintiffs’ proprietary rights in its trademark ‘HERO’ and that the Defendant agrees to stop using the said trademark of the Plaintiffs or any other similar mark. 6.Learned counsel for the defendant states that the compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- stipulated in terms of clause (v) of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 has been paid over to the Plaintiff. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff acknowledges receipt of the demand draft. 7.Learned counsel for the parties jointly clarify that the liquidated damages amount of Rs. 10 lakhs, as recorded in clause (vii) of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 would have to be ascertained at trial in the unlikely event that the Defendant herein acts in breach of the agreement. And, it is post-trial that the Defendant shall be liable to pay the said amount. However, the decree of permanent injunction will continue to bind the Defendant. 8.This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and the Defendant and perused the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. The clarification of clause (vii) is taken on record and parties are bound by the same. 9.The Supreme Court in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd.1, while dealing with the Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) observed that a settlement This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 3 of 4agreement executed between the parties should be placed before the Court for recording it and disposing of the suit in its terms. And, while dealing with the settlement the Court should apply Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement in regard to the subject matter of the suit, to make such settlement effective. 10.This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties as contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 satisfies the requirements of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. 11.The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 is lawful and therefore, this Court does not find any impediment in decreeing the captioned suit in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. 12.The statements and undertaking given by the parties in this agreement are accepted by this Court and the parties are bound by the same. 13.Consequently, the captioned suit is decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 executed between the parties. 14.The Registry of this Court is directed to prepare a decree in terms of this order, and it is directed that the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 shall form part of the said decree. Return of account books 15.Learned counsel for the Defendant states that account books including the bill book of the Defendant was seized by the Local Commissioner during execution of the local commission. 15.1He prays that the said account books be released to the Defendant. 16.Learned counsel for the Plaintiff agrees to the same. 1 (2010) 8 SCC 24 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 4 of 417.This Court has been informed that the account books are in the custody of Local Commissioner. 18.Local Commissioner is directed to release the account books in the presence of the Plaintiff to the Defendant on 29.08.2025 at 12:30 P.M. at a mutually convenient place within the precincts of the Delhi High Court. 18.1.Plaintiff will follow up with the Local Commissioner and ensure due compliance of this direction. Return of Court Fee 19.Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the registry is directed to refund 100% Court Fee in favour of Plaintiff No. 2 within six (6) weeks, in accordance with law. The said direction has been passed having regard to Section 16 and 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in High Court of Judicature at Madras v. M.C. Subramaniam & Ors2.20.Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.21.Future dates, if any, stand cancelled.22.The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the officialwebsite of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treatedas a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. Nophysical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, JAUGUST 22, 2025/mt/AM 2 (2021) 3 SCC 560

Page 1 of 4$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CS(COMM) 263/2023 HERO INVESTCORP PVT LTD AND ANR .....Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Aastha Sharma, Mr. Armaan Bhardwaj, Advocates versus MADNI OIL CENTER .....Defendant Through: Mr. Ryan Singh, Advocate CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORAO R D E R% 22.08.20251.The present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademarks, passing off, rendition of account, damages, declaration of well-known mark of the Plaintiffs i.e., ‘HERO’ by Defendant. 2.This Court vide Order dated 04.04.2025 recorded the submission of the parties that they are willing to explore the possibility of settlement. The Court, on the basis of the said joint request made by the parties, referred the parties to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (‘Mediation Centre’). The mediation has resulted in successful settlement of disputes. 3.Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 executed between the parties before the Mediation Centre has been received. 4.Learned counsel for the parties jointly state that the suit may be decreed of in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. Learned This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 2 of 4counsels for the parties states that parties undertake to remain bound by the terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. 5.It is agreed in the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 that the Defendant recognizes and acknowledges the Plaintiffs’ proprietary rights in its trademark ‘HERO’ and that the Defendant agrees to stop using the said trademark of the Plaintiffs or any other similar mark. 6.Learned counsel for the defendant states that the compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- stipulated in terms of clause (v) of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 has been paid over to the Plaintiff. Learned counsel for the Plaintiff acknowledges receipt of the demand draft. 7.Learned counsel for the parties jointly clarify that the liquidated damages amount of Rs. 10 lakhs, as recorded in clause (vii) of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 would have to be ascertained at trial in the unlikely event that the Defendant herein acts in breach of the agreement. And, it is post-trial that the Defendant shall be liable to pay the said amount. However, the decree of permanent injunction will continue to bind the Defendant. 8.This Court has heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff and the Defendant and perused the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. The clarification of clause (vii) is taken on record and parties are bound by the same. 9.The Supreme Court in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction Co. (P) Ltd.1, while dealing with the Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) observed that a settlement This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 3 of 4agreement executed between the parties should be placed before the Court for recording it and disposing of the suit in its terms. And, while dealing with the settlement the Court should apply Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and make a decree in terms of the settlement in regard to the subject matter of the suit, to make such settlement effective. 10.This Court is satisfied that the compromise between the parties as contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 satisfies the requirements of Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. 11.The compromise contained in the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 is lawful and therefore, this Court does not find any impediment in decreeing the captioned suit in terms of the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025. 12.The statements and undertaking given by the parties in this agreement are accepted by this Court and the parties are bound by the same. 13.Consequently, the captioned suit is decreed in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 executed between the parties. 14.The Registry of this Court is directed to prepare a decree in terms of this order, and it is directed that the Settlement Agreement dated 07.07.2025 shall form part of the said decree. Return of account books 15.Learned counsel for the Defendant states that account books including the bill book of the Defendant was seized by the Local Commissioner during execution of the local commission. 15.1He prays that the said account books be released to the Defendant. 16.Learned counsel for the Plaintiff agrees to the same. 1 (2010) 8 SCC 24 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:56:58 Page 4 of 417.This Court has been informed that the account books are in the custody of Local Commissioner. 18.Local Commissioner is directed to release the account books in the presence of the Plaintiff to the Defendant on 29.08.2025 at 12:30 P.M. at a mutually convenient place within the precincts of the Delhi High Court. 18.1.Plaintiff will follow up with the Local Commissioner and ensure due compliance of this direction. Return of Court Fee 19.Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the registry is directed to refund 100% Court Fee in favour of Plaintiff No. 2 within six (6) weeks, in accordance with law. The said direction has been passed having regard to Section 16 and 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in High Court of Judicature at Madras v. M.C. Subramaniam & Ors2.20.Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.21.Future dates, if any, stand cancelled.22.The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the officialwebsite of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treatedas a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. Nophysical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, JAUGUST 22, 2025/mt/AM 2 (2021) 3 SCC 560