JUDGMENT - Y.K. SABHARWAL, C.J.:---Admit. Counsel for respondent No. 1 waives service. In this appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant gives up respondent No. 2 and states that in fact, the suit itself will be withdrawn against respondent No. 2 and his client would take such appropriate separate proceedings against the said respondent as may be permissible in law. Considering the nature of the controversy, learned Counsel for the parties have made their submissions and submit that the appeal be finally disposed of at this stage itself.

2.The suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, was filled by the appellants complaining of violation of copyright under Copyright Act, 1957, as also infringement of trademark and passing off. The appellant has its office at Mumbai and it carries on business within the jurisdiction of this Court. Respondent is carrying on business at Chennai. It is not in dispute that in regard to violation of copyright which the appellant/plaintiff has alleged in the plaint, this Court has the jurisdiction in view of the provisions of section 62(2) of the Copyright Act which, unlike other enactments, gives right to a plaintiff to institute the suit within the loca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document