Manmohan Singh, J.

1. By this order, I shall dispose of IA No.19079/2011 filed in the CS(OS) No.2982/2011 by the plaintiff under order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC and I.A. No.19081/2011 filed under Section 80(2) CPC.

2. The brief facts of the case are referred as under:

2.1 The plaintiff has filed a suit seeking declaration and consequential reliefs of injunction on the premise that the complaint preferred by the defendant no. 1 against the plaintiff before the defendant no. 2 on the basis of which, the defendant no. 2 is acting upon and interdicting the consignments which are being imported by the plaintiff without preferring an infringement action in accordance with Patents Act 1970 amounts to groundless threats and ought to be prevented by the court.

2.2 The plaintiff claims the following reliefs in the suit:

a) An order of declaration, declaring that the complaint filed by the Defendant no. 1 dated 29th September 2010 before Defendant No. 2 for an alleged infringement of Patent no. 189027 dated 21st September 1998 against the plaintiff constitutes groundless threat.

b) An order for declaration, declaring that the impugned order dated 16th November 2011 passed by Defendant no. 2 is void ab initio and is in breach of the provisions of Patents Act 1970, the Customs Act 1962 and The Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 and the same is liable to be quashed and set aside.

c) An order of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant No.1 from issuing any further groundless threats to the Plaintiff by way of issuance of any circulars, communications or complaints before the Defendants or any other authority.

d) An order for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant Nos.2 & 3 and other Commissioners of Customs (import) at all other Indian Ports from interdicting the import of consignments of goods by the Plaintiff which are otherwise is permitted being in accordance with Plaintiff’s holding status of Accredited Client under the “Accredited Client Programme” issued pursuant to Circular 42/2005 – Cus dated 24th November, 2005, in F.No.450/66/2005-Cu.IV.

e) A decree for damages in excess of Rs.20 lac be awarded against the Defendant No.1 for having lodged frivolous complaints before the Defendant No.2 and causing interference of legitimate business of the Plaintiff as averred in the plaint.

f) An order for cost of proceedings in favour of Plaintiff and against the Defendants.

3. The plaintiff claims in the plaint that it is a renowned company carrying on business under the name and style of LG Electronics India Private Limited, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at A-27, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area, Mathura Road, New Delhi.

4. It is stated that the defendant No.1 is an individual, who claims to have obtained a patent for process titled as "A Process of manufacturing engraved design articles on metals or non-metals" under patent No.189027 dated 21st September, 1998.

5. The defendants No.2 and 3 are Commissioners of Customs (Import), Officers of Customs under Section 3 of Customs Act, 1962 located at Mumbai and Delhi, responsible for, inter alia, levy of an exemption from customs duty, clearance of imported goods, detection of illegally imported goods and prevention of the disposal thereof etc.

6. It is stated that the goods of the plaintiff's parent company, namely, LG Electronics Inc., have been available in India since 1995 through imports from Korea.

7. On 10th March, 1997, the LG Electronics Inc. entered into a foreign collaboration agreement.

8. The plaintiff is an importer at various Indian ports one of them being Mumbai Air Cargo Complex, holding status of an "Accredited Client" under Accredited Client program (ACP) of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India enjoying privileges and using Green Channel for clearance of all its goods imported without examination at Indian Ports on the basis of self-assessment (declaration).

9.