JAYANT NATH, G.ROHINI
YU TELEVENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) – Respondent
Ms.G.ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE
CRL.M.A.No.18179/2015 in LPA No.888/2015 CRL.M.A. No.18178/2015 in LPA No.889/2015
1. The respondent No.1 in LPA Nos.888 & 889/2015 filed these two applications under Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) alleging that the appellants/non-applicants made false statements on oath in the said appeals and, therefore, it is necessary to refer the matter to the concerned Magistrate for appropriate action under Section 195 of Cr.P.C.
2. We may at the outset, refer to the relevant facts in brief.
3. The applicant/Telefonaktiebolaget LM E permanent injunction against the defendants viz. (i) Mercury Electronics Ltd. them from infringing the registered patents of the plaintiff/LM Ericsson. An interim order was passed on 12.11.2014 in IA Nos.3825/2013 & 4694/2013 directing the defendant to pay royalty to the plaintiff at the rate specified therein. Alleging that Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd., which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Micromax/defendant No.2 has been using the suit patents without paying royalty to the plaintiff, Contempt Petittion being CCP No.71/2015 has been filed under Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC against (i) Micromax, (ii) Yu Televentu
Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Union of India & Ors.;AIR 2014 SC 1020
Kishorebhai Gandubhai Pethani Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.; (2014) 13 SCC 539
Mahila Vinod Kumari Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh; (2008) 8 SCC 34
In Re-Suo Moto Proceedings Against R.Karuppan
Iqbal Singh Marwah & Anr. Vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr.; AIR 2005 SC 2119
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.