(OPEN COURT) The plaintiff sues the defendant for permanent injunction and other consequential reliefs, complaining copyright infringement.

2. The suit averments are that the plaintiff is the copyright proprietor of several publications in respect of books. It is contended that the plaintiff has been in the publication business since 1908 as a successor to several firms that were originally formed in 1880. It submits that its worldwide sales are to the tune of US $ 1 billion. It is contended in the suit that the plaintiff’s publications are known the world-over, particularly its educational and text books on specialized subjects, such as Economics, Chemistry etc. According to the plaintiff, it makes available several popular editions in Indian markets; some prominent titles among those are listed in para 5 of the suit. According to the averments, Special editions are priced differently and adapted to cater to Indian markets. The suit contends that the plaintiff granted time-bound permission to the defendant to reprint and sell 24 titles in the Indian market. These ermissions were in the form of agreements entered into on various dates, each having a life-span of five years. It is submitted that the time-period in all the cases expired exactly after five years and the last of such agreements expired on 09.07.2003.

3. The suit refers to some correspondence between the parties where the defendant had sought extension of time and additionally, permission for marketing the plaintiff’s titles and reprints of other editions. The suit alleges that in December 2005, the plaintiff discovered that the defendant was unauthorizedly offering its books and publications for sale on the Internet. It is also alleged that in February 2006, the plaintiff discovered that the defendant was illegally reprinting, selling, supplying and stocking re-prints of its (plaintiff’s) works. In para 14, the plaintiff has listed 19 of its publications (termed as "best sellers"), which were allegedly unauthorisedly offered for sale. The plaintiff submits to having purchased such allegedly infringing copies, and thereafter sought recourse to criminal proceedings, which led to Search and Seizure by the police authorities, pursuant to proceedings arising out of FIR No. 140/2006. The suit contends that the defendant had stocked a large number of such infringing goods, including 900 copies of Introduction to Programming and Strategic Approach; 800 copies of English online – Student’s Guide to Internet & Worldwide Web; 500 copies of Lotus 123 for Windows etc.

4. The plaintiff contends that a complaint was filed on 29.03.2006 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, who had permitted Search and Seizure from the defendant’s premises. On this basis, it is alleged that all such acts of the defendant in continuing to stock and offering for sale titles of various text books in which the plaintiff owns copyright amounts to infringement and consequently, the defendant should be appropriately interdicted with a decree for permanent injunction and also saddled with damages and a decree for rendition of accounts.

5. The defendant resists the proceedings. The essential aspects pertaining to the plaintiff’s copyrights and the foundational facts pertaining to the license arrangement with the defendant are not disputed. However, the defendant contends that the parties had entered into negotiations which culminated in an assurance or understanding whereby he (the defendant) could market the titles in question. The defendant further submits that out of the 24 titles, which he was licensed to market and sell in India, despite considerable efforts, only 5 titles or text books could be popularized, and to his dismay, it was discovered that the plaintiff had behind his back, entered into arrangements with one M/s. Biztantra for sale of Indian editions and their reprints. The defendant also reiterates the same submissions in the Counter-Claim where it is asse