SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(Del) 24

High Court Of Delhi
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
TATA PRESS - Respondent
Interim Application 6466 of 1993
Decided On : 01/11/1994

Advocates Appeared:
A.H.Desai, A.K.SIKRI, A.K.VERMA, M.M.Sharma, MADHU SIKRI, S.K.KAPOOR, SUNIL GUPTA, Vikram Dholakia

Headnote:CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908 - Section 10 — stay of suit-pending disposal of a suit at Bombay between the same parties in respect of same cause of action-application for stay allowed.

        Section 10 — stay of suit under-does not take away the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain interlocutory applications and to pass interim orders.

       Section 11-Resjudicata-plea of-raised as a suit between same parties and same cause of action disposed of by Bombay Court-the judgment under appeal-plea of resjudicata can not be raised.

       Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 — application under-seeking injunction restraining the Tat a Press from publishers its yellow Pages-without authority from authorities under Rule 458 of Telegraph rules — rule 458 struck down by Bombay Court-similar directories by private publishers already in vogue-defendant already spent about Rs. 4 Crores-no chances of revenue loss to MTNL as it has already entered into five year contract for its yellow pages with a private contractor-injunction declined-directions given.

J. K. MEHRA, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff has filed this suit, alleging that the defendant in intending to publish yellow pages the defendant known as Tara Press Yellow Pages (hereinafter referred to as the "yellow pages") is in violation of the Rule 458 of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951. The plaintiff has also filed with the plaint aforesaid applicalion under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code being I. A. 3592/93 seeking an interim injunction restraining the defendants from printing and/or publishing and/or advertising and/or distributing the "yellow Pages" booklet to anyone. No ex-parte interim injunction was granted in this case and notices were issued to the defendants who have since filed reply to the injunction application. The case of the plaintiff mainly is that the publication and printing of the said yellow pages in the form sought to be published by the defendant is nothing but publication of a parallel directory in an abridged form on the line of the yellow pages which are at present forming a supplement to the directory of the telephone subscribers being got printed by the plaintiff. It is further contended by the plaintiff that bulk of the entries of the "yellow pages" are mere list of telephone subscribers listed Trade-wise free of charge and only a small number of such parties are coming forward with advertisements in the said "yellow pages" and to the extent that the "yellow pages" can be described as a list of telephone subscribers and that would be deemed to be publication of a telephone directory as contemplated by the aforesaid Rule 458 of Indian Telegraph Rules. Counsel for the plaintiff has contended that the aforesaid rule should receive widest possible interpretation and that any limited interpretation would only defeat the intention of the rule and make it redundant. Counsel has cited the meaning given to telephone directory in certain dictionaries such as Webster wherein it has been given the following meaning:-

"classified section of telephone directory listing subscribers by the type of business or service they offer". And new Oxford English Dictionary wherein directory is defined as under:-

"a book containing an alphabetical orclassified, list of the people in some category, e. g. telephone subscribers or clergy with information about them. "

( 2 ) IN the same dictionary yellow pagehave also been separately dealt with which is as under:-

" (PROPRIETORY name for) the classified section of or supplement to a telephone directory, printed on yellow paper and listing firms, products and services. "

( 3 ) THE claim of the plaintiff both in suit as also injunction application has been contested by the defendants. Counsel for defendants has cited Collin dictionary wherein the expressions "directory", "classified Directory", "commercial Directory or Trade Directory" and "telephone Directory are explained as under:- "directory" noun list of people or businesses with information about their addresses and telephone numbers: "classified Directory" list of businesses grouped under various headings, such as computer shopes or newsagents: "commercial Directory or trade Directory" book which lists all the businesses and business people in a town; "telephone Directory" book which lists all people and business who have telephones, in alphabetical order with their phone numbers.

( 4 ) HE has argued that the expressions "commercial Directory or Trade Directory" convey quite distinct and different meaning from "telephone Directory" and they cannot be deemed to be the same. He also cited Black s Law Dictionary wherein word "directory" is explained as under:-

"directory", Book containing names, addresses, and occupations of inhabitants of city. Also any list or compilation, usually in book or pamphlet form, or persons, professional organisations, firms or corporations forming some class separate and distinct from others, e. g. telephone directory, lawyer s directory, hotel directory etc. "it is further contended that











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top