( 1 ) BY this application under O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 read with S. 151, C. P. C. plaintiffs have prayed for an ad interim injunction to restrain the Defendants from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in Machines that are substantial imitation and reproduction of the design, manuals and Drawings of the Plaintiffs Fodder Production Unit and thereby amounting to infringement of the Plaintiffs Copyright therein, or from dealing in those Machines made on the basis of information and knowhow disclosed to them by the Plaintiffs in conditions of strict confidence, and from doing any other thing as is likely to lead to passing off the Defendants products as those of the plaintiffs.

( 2 ) IN the Suit, the Plaintiffs have sought permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from infringing Copyright of the plaintiffs, from passing off Defendants products as those of the plaintiffs , for rendition of accounts of profits, and for delivery up of ail infringing materials and articles etc.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the plaintiffs, John Richard Brady (hereinafter referred as Brady) is an American National. He is a Mechanical Engineer and is the President and Managing Director of Fometa overseas S. A. Castellana, Madrid, Spain. He conceived the idea of growing fresh given grass used as basis found for livestock in a compact unit capable of producing grass throughout the year irrespective of external climatic conditions. He developed the original Fodder Production Unit in the year 1972. It was tested under extreme climatic conditions in various Countries in the World. Steps were taken, from time to time, to improve the unit by optimising its size and achieving greater productivity. After extensive experimentation, an improved Fodder Production Unit (hereinafter referred to as the FPU) was invented by Brady. He applied for grant of patent in India in relation to the FPU. His patent application is pending. Technical details of the FPU are contained in catalogues which illustrate it by technical Drawings and. other specifications. The Drawings are the original artistic work. Brady is the owner of Copyright in the Drawings and is entitled to exclusive right to publish and reproduce the Drawings whether two dimensionally or three dimensionally.

( 4 ) IT is alleged that Brady collaborated and set up plaintiff No. 2, a joint venture Company Fometa (India) Machine Private Ltd. Plaintiff No. 3 Sanjeevani Fodder Production Private Ltd. was formed for purpose of establishing and operating the first fodder production feed station as a prototype model commercial facility in India. It was decided by the plaintiffs that a phased programme would be adopted to manufacture the FPU in India for both domestic and export sales. To indigenise manufacture of the FPU, the Plaintiffs sought quotations from Defendant No. 1 for the supply of thermal panels manufactured by it. The panels required were of highly specialised type. To enable the Defendants to send their quotations for supply of the said components and to precisely match those components with the FPU, all the technical material, detailed know how, Drawings and specifications concerning the FPU were passed on to Defendant No. 1 under express condition that it must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the knowhow. Discussions between the parties culminated in an agreement whereby Defendant No. 1 agreed to supply the specialised thermal panels required by the Plaintiffs. Terms and conditions of the agreement were set out in a letter dated 31-8-84 written by Defendant No. 1 to Plaintiff No. 3. Later, Plaintiffs discovered the inability of the Defendants to supply the required thermal panels, so, they did not place any order on the Defendants. It is alleged that Defendant No. 2, who is Managing Director of Defendant No. 1, along with several other representatives of the Defendants, with a view to acquire the working knowhow and technology of the FPU, made a number o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document