XX Vs Y

XX vs Y

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 13, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1272289

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1272289
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh
Decided On: Apr 13, 2026
Case Number: CS(COMM)/1169/2025
Subject: Intellectual Property

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Intellectual Property

Key legal issue: Intellectual Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Advocate Mr. Kunal Khanna, Ms. Priyanshi Gupta, Mr. Anuj Dhar, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Mr. Kaulik Mitra, Mr. Samanyu Bhatnagar

Respondent

Advocate Mr. Jayant Mudgal

Excerpt

.....jayant mudgal, advocate.coram:hon'ble ms. justice jyoti singhorder% 13.04.20261. this suit is instituted on behalf of the plaintiffs inter alia seeking adecree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant and all others acting on its behalf from manufacturing, trading, supplying, selling, marketing, in any manner, including online sale of any goods using plaintiff no. l’s ‘hero’ trademarks and/or any other mark deceptively similar thereto, amounting to infringement.2. during the pendency of the suit parties were referred for mediationbefore the delhi high court mediation and conciliation centre, where they have amicably resolved their inter se disputes and executed a settlement agreement dated 12.02.2026, incorporating the terms of settlement, wherein defendant has acknowledged the proprietary rights of the plaintiffs in the ‘hero’ trademarks and agreed that neither the defendant nor its associates,cs(comm) 1169/2025 page 1 of 2servants, stockists, distributors or anyone acting on its behalf shall manufacture, sell, advertise and/or distribute, counterfeit or infringing goods bearing plaintiffs’ hero trademarks/logos/labels and/or packaging relating thereto. defendant also agreed to pay a sum of rs. 1,50,000/- to the plaintiffs as compensation which admittedly stands paid by way of demand draft on 12.02.2026. copy of the settlement agreement has been placed on record along with copy of demand draft dated 07.02.2026.3. court has perused the terms of settlement and finds the same to belawful. accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the plaint read with the settlement agreement, terms of which shall bind the parties thereto.4. registry is directed to draw up the decree sheet.5. suit along with pending application stands disposed of.6. plaintiffs are held entitled to refund of entire court fees in accordance with court fees act, 1870. jyoti singh, j april 13, 2026/rw cs(comm) 1169/2025 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 1169/2025 & I.A. 27151/2025 HERO INVESTCORP PVT. LTD. AND ANR .....Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Kunal Khanna, Ms. Priyanshi Gupta, Mr. Anuj Dhar, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Mr. Kaulik Mitra and Mr. Samanyu Bhatnagar, Advocates.
versus
K.D. RUBBER INDUSTRIES .....Defendant Through: Mr. Jayant Mudgal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

ORDER

% 13.04.2026

1. This suit is instituted on behalf of the Plaintiffs inter alia seeking a

decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant and all others acting on its behalf from manufacturing, trading, supplying, selling, marketing, in any manner, including online sale of any goods using Plaintiff No. l’s ‘HERO’ trademarks and/or any other mark deceptively similar thereto, amounting to infringement.

2. During the pendency of the suit parties were referred for mediation

before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, where they have amicably resolved their inter se disputes and executed a Settlement Agreement dated 12.02.2026, incorporating the terms of settlement, wherein Defendant has acknowledged the proprietary rights of the Plaintiffs in the ‘HERO’ trademarks and agreed that neither the Defendant nor its associates,

CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 1 of 2

servants, stockists, distributors or anyone acting on its behalf shall manufacture, sell, advertise and/or distribute, counterfeit or infringing goods bearing Plaintiffs’ HERO trademarks/logos/labels and/or packaging relating thereto. Defendant also agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the Plaintiffs as compensation which admittedly stands paid by way of Demand Draft on 12.02.2026. Copy of the Settlement Agreement has been placed on record along with copy of Demand Draft dated 07.02.2026.

3. Court has perused the terms of settlement and finds the same to be

lawful. Accordingly, the suit is decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the plaint read with the Settlement Agreement, terms of which shall bind the parties thereto.

4. Registry is directed to draw up the decree sheet.

5. Suit along with pending application stands disposed of.

6. Plaintiffs are held entitled to refund of entire court fees in accordance with Court Fees Act, 1870. JYOTI SINGH, J APRIL 13, 2026/RW CS(COMM) 1169/2025 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2026 Same Parties XX vs Y Same Subject Intellectual Property Same Judge Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh