The Gujarat High Court recently passed a consent decree in terms of a settlement arrived between renowned Symphony coolers and Raj Cooling System Pvt Ltd in connection with a suit for permanent injunction instituted under the Designs Act, 2000.
The suit was filed by Symphony Ltd. alleging infringement of the Designs Act by the Respondent company, alleging that the latter has been selling their product of air cooler having model name ALLWYN AC201 and ALLWYN AC203, whose is similar to Symphony's design vide registration no. 288184.
The Plaintiff sought that the Defendant party to calculate the amount of profit earned by them by the sale of such air coolers and thereby furnish this amount to the Plaintiffs along with 18% interest from the date of the suit till realisation. It was further sought that the Defendants destroy the moulds for the air coolers, along with the cooler frames, bodies, printing materials, blocks, dyes, stencils, stationery materials, and related apparatus which was used to infringe the products of the Plaintiff.
A Bench consisting Justice Bhargav Karia noted that during the pendency of the suit, the Plaintiff and the Defendants had arrived at a settlement and pursuant to the Application under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC, the Plaintiff had placed the 'Consent Terms' on record.
The High Court noted that the Consent Terms were drafted in order to settle the matter amicably in following terms:
- The Defendant should not make any application for the registration of design which was similar or which may be pirated or an obvious imitation of the Plaintiff's products.
- The Defendant should surrender grants/licenses/permissions given by the Government authority in relation to the air cooler or any other product which infringed the design of the Plaintiff's products.
- The Defendant should within 15 days of signing the Consent Terms surrender all infringing products, dyes, moulds, machines or any related apparatus which were used for infringing the registered design of the Plaintiff's products.
- The Defendant should also undertake to refrain from using identical air coolers which may have been imitated from the Plaintiff's products.
- The Defendant should be refrained from using any identical or deceptively/confusingly similar design which leads to obvious imitation of the registered/unregistered design of the Plaintiff.
- The Defendant should indemnify the Plaintiff against all costs, charges. Damages, claims, suits and expenses against the use of the infringed product of the Plaintiff.
- The Plaintiff, in return, agreed not to claim any damages, loss of profit from the current suit against the Defendant in consideration of the settlement terms.
- The parties to the suit must bear their own expenses and costs related to the suit.
Accordingly, the proceedings which were held before the Controller of Design were withdrawn and the Defendant undertook not to challenge the Plaintiff's registered design.
Keeping in view the settlement and the cancellation proceedings, the High Court concluded the dispute and deemed it to be settled. All parties were directed to abide by the Consent Terms.
Case Title: SYMPHONY LIMITED Versus RAJ COOLING SYSTEM PRIVATE LIMITED
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 190