IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Navin Chawla, J.
Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - Plaintiffs
Versus
Airhdx.Com & Ors. - Defendants
CS(COMM) 54 of 2020 & I.A. 1508 of 2020
Decided On : 30-11-2022
Civil Procedure Code, 1950 – Section 151 – Order XIII-A – Order I Rule 10 – Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022 – Rule 27 – Copyright Act, 1957 – Section 37 – Department of Telecommunications – Board of Control for Cricket in India – Application has been filed by plaintiffs praying for a Summary Judgment under provisions of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 praying for reliefs.
Finding of the court :
Court noted that defendants nos.1 to 11 have chosen not to file any written statement or contest suit – They were accordingly proceeded ex-parte in present suit –Since defendant nos.1 to 11 have chosen not to enter appearance in present suit despite service of notice, in court opinion, suit can be heard and decided summarily – Defendant nos. 1 to 11 have no real prospect of defending claim of infringement of plaintiffs’ Exclusive Rights in the copyright and have chosen to not contest said suit – Present matter is mainly concerned with enforcement of injunction orders, which are passed against ‘Rogue Websites’ who use anonymity offered by internet to engage in illegal acts of infringement – Fit case for passing a Summary Judgment by invoking the provisions of Order XIII-A of CPC, as applicable to commercial disputes of a specified value, read with Rule 27 of Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022.
Results : Disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
I.A. 18850/2022 (U/o XIII-A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908)
1. This application has been filed by the plaintiffs praying for a Summary Judgment under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (in short ‘CPC’), inter-alia, praying for the following reliefs:-
i. Pass an order and decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant Nos. 1 to 11 (and such other websites/entities which are discovered during the course of the proceedings to have been engaging in infringing the Plaintiffs' Exclusive Rights), their owners, partners, proprietors, officers, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on their behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, from in any manner hosting, streaming, broadcasting, rebroadcasting, retransmitting, exhibiting, making available for viewing and downloading, providing access to and/or communicating to the public, displaying, uploading, modifying, publishing, updating, sharing (including to its subscribers and users), on their websites, through the internet in any manner whatsoever, the broadcast of the New Zealand Tour, 2020 and the content related thereto, amounting to unfair competition and commercial misappropriation of the Plaintiffs' rights,
ii. Pass an order and decree directing the Defendant No. 12, its directors, partners, proprietors, officers, affiliates, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and, on their behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, to suspend the domain name registration of domain names of Defendants No. 1 as identified by the Plaintiffs in the instant suit at Memo of Parties or such other domain names that may subsequently be notified by the Plaintiffs to be of Rogue Websites which infringe its exclusive rights;
iii. Pass an order and decree directing the Defendant Nos. 13 to 21, their directors, partners, proprietors, officers, affiliates, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on their behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, to block access to the various websites identified by the Plaintiffs in the instant suit, at S. No. 2 of the Documents or such other websites that may subsequently be notified by the Plaintiffs to be infringing of its exclusive rights;
iv. Pass an order and decree directing the Defendant Nos. 22 and 23 to issue a notification calling upon the various internet and telecom service providers registered under it to block access to the various websites identified by the Plaintiffs in the instant suit at S. No. 2 of the Documents or such other websites that may subsequently be notified by the Plaintiffs to be infringing of its exclusive rights;
v. An order for damages of Rs. 2,00,01,000/-to be paid by the Defendant Nos. 1 to 11 (and such other websites/entities which are discovered during the course of the proceedings to have been engaging in infringing the Plaintiffs' exclusive rights), to the Plaintiffs on account of their illegal and infringing activities and a decree for the said amount be passed in favour of the Plaintiffs (the Plaintiffs reserve their right to claim additional damages and amend the pleadings accordingly once the magnitude of the Defendants' illegal/infringing activities and the revenues earned by the Defendants' in pursuance to such illegal/infringing activities is ascertained upon discovery in the instant action);
vi. An order for delivery of all the apparatus and/or material that the Defendant Nos. 1 to 11 use or may be using to infringe the Plaintiffs' exclusive rights, to the authorized representatives of the Plaintiffs for the purposes of destruction;
vii. An order for rendition of accounts of profits illegally earned by the
Provisions of Order XIII-A of CPC, as applicable to commercial disputes.#12;
Indian Copyright Act, 1957 confers a bundle of exclusive rights on owner of a “work” and provides for remedies in case copyright is infringed.
Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction, ruling that balance of convenience favored plaintiffs in preventing irreparable harm from copyright infringements during legal proceedings.
Summary judgment can be granted if the Defendant has no real prospect of succeeding in the matter, and the Court may explore the possibility of deciding the dispute by a summary judgment without a sp....
The judgment establishes the need for dynamic injunctions to protect copyrighted works, including future works, and emphasizes the role of ISPs and government authorities in combating internet piracy....
The court exercised discretion to allow separate trials despite the suit not meeting the requirements of joinder of plaintiffs, and relied on legal provisions to direct the defendants to block access....
The court established that unauthorized distribution of cinematograph films constitutes copyright infringement, allowing for dynamic injunctions to protect against evolving infringement tactics.
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.