- (1.) This contempt application has arisen in connection with the petitioners/plaintiffs action for infringement of their process patent of their product Fair and Lovely skin cream. The petitioner sought various reliefs including damages against the respondents/defendants, and in connection therewith application for interlocutory relief was taken out and they were successful in obtaining order of injunction from this Court. However, that interim order of injunction was vacated on combined disposal of the suit and the interlocutory application. Good sense prevailed upon between the parties as they settled the dispute, involved in the suit, as well as the interlocutory application by filing the terms of settlement. The relevant clauses of the terms of settlement, which are germane in the contempt application, are set out hereunder. "Clause 3 : Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 through Mr. T.A. Srinivasan, Company Secretary of the Defendant No. 1, give an undertaking to this Hon"ble Court not to manufacture and/or market either by themselves or by their servants, agents or assigns any fairness cream by using silicon compound in combination with the other ingredients converted in Patent No. 169917 of the Plaintiff namely Niacinamide, Parsol MCX, Parson 1789 with effect from 15th Sept. 2000. 4. The Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 through Mr. T.A. Srinivasan, Company Secretary of the Defendant No. 1, give an undertaking to this Honble Court to exhaust all finished and semi finished FAIREVER Fairness Cream available with them at present and which may be manufactured till 14th Sept. 2000 in terms of Clause 3 above consisting of Silicone Compound on or before 30th Sept. 2000. 5. The plaintiff undertakesnot to interfere with the sale of FAIREVER Fairness Cream manufactured on or before 15th Sept. 2000 containing Silicone Compound and lying with wholesalers, re-distribution stockist and retailers."
(2.) Once it was thought that the dispute and differences between the parties have come to an end but it reveals now in present contempt application the plaintiff alleges breach of undertaking. Now, it is being examined whether there is breach of the aforesaid Undertaking.
(3.) Before I examine the nature of the allegations, I would appropriately record that the aforesaid undertaking not only recorded in the signed document, namely the terms of settlement filed in Court, but the respondent No. 3 himself appeared before this Court and on oath, he accepted and acknowledged the aforesaid undertaking having been given to this Court.;