The High Court in Delhi concluded an action for a breach of trademarks filed by Nestle SA, the parent company of the popular Nuodle Maggi, after entering the accused.
Nestle has filed a lawsuit against the company that was the production of tools under the name “Maggisun”, which FMCG Giant considered problematic.
Delhi’s HC order was released on 22 September.
The judiciary of Tejas Karia ordered the lawsuit after the defendant Shankeshwar Sutensils & Appliances Private Limited said it did not produce products called “Maggisun” or any other brand that imitated Maggi.
“The action is ordered in terms of settlement, which has occurred between the parties, as recorded above. Let the sheet of decrees be drawn up accordingly. The parties are directed to be bound by the settlement conditions,” Dilli reads.
“The suit and the waiting application are destroyed,” he adds.
The case was filed by Societe des Produits Nestle SA, the official company name FMCG Giant Nestlé Company, in 2018.
What does the settlement agreement say?
In his obligation, the defendant Shankeshwar Nazenzils and appliances stated that he recognized Nestle as the trademark owner Maggi.
“The defendant undertakes not to produce, sell, offer for sale, advertise, directly or indirectly deal with pressure cookers or any goods/services under the Maggisun trademark or any other trademarks that may be the same as or similar to Maggi or any other similar trade that is in any suburban Income, or is it in any societies, or is it in any social, or what is concerned, or what is concerned or what is concerned or what else.
The company also undertook to destroy all pressure cookers and other goods, including the label and labels carrying the name Maggisun and submitted photographic evidence Nestle SA within two weeks, and also to cancel the registration of the trademark for the name.
Nestle agreed that in this case he would not push the remaining prayers: “If the action is ordered in terms of the above -mentioned settlement, it arrived between the parties”.
(Tagstotranslate) Delhi High Court
