Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

Neon Laboratories LimitedversusCopi Medicare Pvt Ltd

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court decreed the suit on admission of the prayer clauses and allowed the leave petition, having accepted the parties' consent terms as an undertaking.

Summary

The plaintiff, Neon Laboratories Ltd., filed a commercial IP suit against Copi Medicare Pvt Ltd and another defendant. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement, documented in consent terms signed by the plaintiff’s counsel and the defendants’ representatives, with identities verified via Aadhaar. The court accepted the consent terms as an undertaking, decreed the suit on admission of the prayer clauses (a), (b) and (d), ordered a refund of court fees, and disposed of any pending applications. A related leave petition was taken on board and, in view of the settlement, was allowed. The judgment thus formalised the settlement and closed the proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether the suit can be decreed on admission of the prayer clauses in light of the parties' settlement.
  • Whether the leave petition seeking relief should be allowed after the settlement.

Subjects

  • settlement
  • consent decree
  • commercial IP suit
  • decree on admission
  • court fees refund

Judgment

2026:BHC-OS:10914

                                                                   7 COMIP(L)-39333-2025.doc


                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                       IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

                                COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 39333 OF 2025
                                                WITH
                                   LEAVE PETITION NO. 220 OF 2025
                                                 IN
                                COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO. 39333 OF 2025

                Neon Laboratories Limited                                 ...Plaintiff
                          Versus
                Copi Medicare Pvt Ltd and Another                         ...Defendants

                                              ——————
                Ms. Taniya Shaikh i/b ms. Pooja Jain and Sunny Pathak for Plaintiff.
                Mr. Sanketbhai Chandubhai Lakhani, Director of Defendant No. 1.
                Monic Goyal, Partner of Defendant No. 2 (through VC).
                                              ——————

                                             CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.
                                             DATE    : 28th APRIL, 2026


                P. C. :

                Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 39333 of 2025 :

                1.        This Court is informed that the dispute has been amicably settled

                between the parties.

                2.        The Consent Terms are tendered which are taken on record and

                marked ‘X’ for identification.

                3.        The Consent Terms are signed by the Plaintiff, by the director of

                Defendant No. 1 and the partner of Defendant No. 2. The parties are


                Sairaj                              1 of 2
                                                    7 COMIP(L)-39333-2025.doc


present virtually and reiterates the terms of the Consent Terms. Their

identity is verified from their aadhar card which is placed on record.

The certified copy of the resolutions are annexed to the Consent

Terms.

4.       The statements made in the Consent Terms are accepted as

undertaking given to this Court.

5.       The suit is decreed on admission in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b)

and (d) of the plaint.

6.       Refund of Court-fees as per rules.

7.       In view of above, nothing survives for consideration in pending

Applications, if any, and the same stand disposed of.

Leave Petition No. 220 of 2025 :

8.       Not on Board. Taken on Board.

9.       As the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties,

Leave Petition is allowed.




                                        [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]




Sairaj                              2 of 2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.