The Delhi High Court has imposed costs of ₹10 lakh on Parle Agro for failing to comply with the Court's earlier direction to periodically disclose its sales figures during the pendency of its trademark dispute with PepsiCo [PepsiCo Vs Parle Agro]..Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the order on an application filed by PepsiCo alleging violation of the Court’s September 18, 2023 directions governing Parle Agro’s use of the tagline 'For The Bold' in relation to its 'B Fizz' beverage."Though this Court is not of the opinion that the non submission of the certificate of sales revenue every two months effective from the time the use of the label containing ‘For The Bold’ commenced till date, is wilful, but nonetheless, is a clear unambiguous and serious violation of the order of this Court. Neither an explanation nor an apology for the same is either tendered or is discernible from the contents of both the affidavits," the Court said..PepsiCo had moved the Court in 2021 with a suit to restrain Parle Agro from using the tagline 'For The Bold' on its 'B Fizz' beverage label.During the pendency of the suit, the Court had declined to restrain Parle Agro from using the tagline. However, it had imposed specific conditions for its use during the pendency of the case.These included a restraint on using the tagline as the predominant part of advertising campaigns, a direction to take down certain Facebook advertisements, and a requirement to file certified sales figures of 'B Fizz' every two months..Subsequently, PepsiCo filed an application highlighting that Parle Agro had continued to use the tagline on social media. Though the Court found that two posts containing the tagline had remained online, it accepted Parle Agro’s explanation that these were older posts from 2022 that were inadvertently not taken down.The omission did not amount to deliberate or wilful disobedience, it held. The Court also observed that such lapses could occur given the volume of content handled by the company and, thus, did not warrant punitive action..However, on the issue of sales disclosures, the Court took a stricter view. It found that Parle Agro had failed to file certified sales returns every two months as directed, for over two and a half years.The Court rejected the company’s argument that such disclosures would only become relevant at the stage of trial. It said that compliance with judicial directions cannot depend on a party’s assessment of their importance.“The issue is whether a direction passed is or is not implemented in time by either of the parties. Clearly and unambiguously, the defendant has not complied with such directions. Manifestly, the defendant also cannot contend that it had no knowledge of the directions so passed in the order dated 18.09.2023. The defendant surely cannot expect the Court to countenance such a stand taken by it,” the Bench said..Sanctity and purity attached to Court’s orders must at all times be maintained, the Court said while proceeding to impose ₹10 lakh costs on Parle Agro. The amount has to be paid to the Bharat Ke Veer fund within three weeks.It also directed the deponent of the company’s affidavits to tender an unconditional apology within four weeks. The suit will be heard next on September 10..PepsiCo was represented by Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan with advocates Avni Sharma, Aparna Singh, Deepak Gogia, Aadhar Nautiyal and Shivangi Kohli..Parle was represented by Senior Advocate Chander M Lall and advocates Ankit Arvind, Shashwat Rakshit and Nidhi Pathak..[Read Order]
