New Delhi, Oct 22 The Delhi High Court recorded a settlement between Mars Incorporated and Cadbury (India) Ltd over the use of the mark ‘CELEBRATIONS’, bringing an end to a nearly 25-year-old trademark dispute between the two confectionery giants.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while decreeing the suit, observed that the decades-long contest had finally concluded “not in discord, but in harmony.”
“For nearly twenty-five years, two titans of the confectionery world – Mars and Cadbury – have stood before this Court, locked in contest over the trademark ‘CELEBRATIONS’. Today, that long journey finds its conclusion. The curtains are drawn at last, not in discord, but in harmony,” observed Justice Narula.
Under the terms of settlement, both companies agreed to withdraw their respective opposition and rectification proceedings pending before the Indian Trade Marks Registry. The agreement, dated July 3, 2025, was found to be “lawful and voluntarily executed,” the Delhi High Court noted.
It also took note of a joint goodwill initiative proposed by the two companies, which expressed their wish “to mark this closure with a gesture befitting the very word they had so long contended over – Celebrations.” In a voluntary undertaking, Mars and Cadbury committed to distributing assortments of their confectionery products worth Rs 5 lakh each to schoolchildren across Delhi.
As per the Delhi High Court order, the exercise will be supervised by the Directorate of Education and the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA). It said, “The distribution shall take place preferably before the main festival, under the supervision of the Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD), and the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA)”.
Justice Narula lauded the settlement, observing: “Even in fiercely competitive industries, corporate rivalry need not eclipse social responsibility. True celebration lies not in triumph over another, but in generosity towards others.” The Delhi High Court remarked that the true value of the case lay not in its extensive pleadings, but in “the conduct of the parties at its close.”
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor