SULA VINEYARDS LIMITED Through its Authorized Representative Mr Rakesh Kumar Singh PATADE ATMARAM WAMAN vs EAGLE WINES PRIVATE LIMITED — COMIP/147/2026

Case under Trade Marks Act Section 26. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020429792025

e-Filing Number

29-12-2025

Filing Number

COMIP/42978/2025

Filing Date

30-Dec-2025

Registration No

COMIP/147/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Bench Type

Single

Category

MERCANTILE LAWS COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS , BANKS ( 28 )

Sub-Category

TRADE MARKS ( 20 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Trade Marks Act Section 26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SULA VINEYARDS LIMITED Through its Authorized Representative Mr Rakesh Kumar Singh PATADE ATMARAM WAMAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.EAGLE WINES PRIVATE LIMITED

  2. 2.LATA SUBHASH PATIL

  3. 3.SUBHASH APPAJI PATIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. DeshmukhView PDF

    Summary: The Bombay High Court decreed the Commercial IP suit between Sula Vineyards Limited and Eagle Wines Private Limited on March 26, 2026, after the parties amicably settled their dispute. The court accepted the signed consent terms as an undertaking and granted a decree in favor of the plaintiff in terms of all prayer clauses (a), (b), (c), and (d), while discharging the Court Receiver and disposing of the Leave Petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    For Settlement / Consent Terms

    Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

  4. 30-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. COMIP/147/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Bombay High Court decreed the Commercial IP suit between Sula Vineyards Limited and Eagle Wines Private Limited on March 26, 2026, after the parties amicably settled their dispute. The court accepted the signed consent terms as an undertaking and granted a decree in favor of the plaintiff in terms of all prayer clauses (a), (b), (c), and (d), while discharging the Court Receiver and disposing of the Leave Petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case