SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 3033

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Sap Se – Appellant
Versus
Intellipaat Software Solutions Private Limited & Ors. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 303 of 2020
Decided On : 21-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ranjan Narula and Ms. Shashi Ojha, Advocates, for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Anand Shankar Jha, Ms. Meenakshi Devgan, Mr. Abhilekh Tiwari & Mr. Sachin Mintri, Advocates, for D-33.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of intellectual property rights, including trademarks and copyrighted materials, under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999.

Headnote:

SAP - Trademark Infringement - Indian Copyright Act, 1957, Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999 - The court granted a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from hosting, reproducing, and distributing copyrighted SAP software and infringing the well-known trademarks SAP, SAP logo, and SAP HANA. The court also decreed in favor of the Plaintiff against the Defendants and intermediaries, and directed the freezing of the Defendant's bank account and transfer of the domain name to the Plaintiff.

Fact of the Case:

The Plaintiff, SAP SE, filed a suit for permanent injunction against Defendants for using the mark SAP as domain names with different variations, alleging infringement of its copyright-protected SAP training materials and software.

Finding of the Court:

The court found in favor of the Plaintiff, granting a permanent injunction and decreeing in favor of the Plaintiff against the Defendants and intermediaries. The court also directed the freezing of the Defendant's bank account and transfer of the domain name to the Plaintiff.

Issues: Trademark and copyright infringement, passing off of business/services/products, disclosure of infringing software sources, and impleading of additional Defendants.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999 to grant the injunction and decree in favor of the Plaintiff, emphasizing the protection of intellectual property rights and the prevention of unauthorized use of the Plaintiff's trademarks and copyrighted materials.

Final Decision: The court decreed in favor of the Plaintiff against the Defendants and intermediaries, granting a permanent injunction and directing the freezing of the Defendant's bank account and transfer of the domain name to the Plaintiff.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present suit for permanent injunction has been filed by SAP SE against various Defendants who were using the mark SAP as domain names with different variations. Initially, the present suit was filed impleading 26 Defendants, wherein Defendant No. 1- Intellipaat Software Solutions Private Limited, was infringing the Plaintiff's rights in its various software programmes under the name `SAP' and Defendants Nos. 2-24 were intermediaries. The Plaintiff had also impleaded Department of Telecommunications and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY), of the Union of India as Defendant Nos. 25-26. In addition, Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) GoDaddy.com, LLC and Cloudflare, Inc. were impleaded as Defendant Nos. 27 and 28 to secure the prayer for deactivation of access to the impugned website i.e., www.intellipaat.com. Defendant No. 29- ICICI Bank was also impleaded seeking a direction for freezing the account of Defendant No. 1.

3. The Plaintiff company was incorporated in Germany and adopted the mark SAP in 1972. The grievance in this suit is that the Defendant No.1 i.e., Intellipaat Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd. had registered a domain name www.intellipaat.com, on which it is providing training on SAP products/services using copyright-protected SAP training materials and software. Vide order dated 5th August, 2020, the Court had granted an interim injunction in the following terms:

    "8. Considering the averments in the plaint as also the documents filed therewith, this Court finds that the plaintiff has made out a prima facie in its favour and in case no ad-interim ex-parte injunction is granted, the plaintiff would suffer an irreparable loss. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiff. Consequently, an ad-interim injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c) of IA 6558/2020 till the next date of hearing before this Court. In view of the undertaking on behalf of the defendant No. 1 that the defendant No. 1 will be removing all the alleged infringing material from the website of the defendant as also from third party platform where unauthorized use of the SAP programmes are going on within 72 hours, at this stage, this Court is refraining from passing any ad-interim order in terms of prayer (e), (f) and (g) of the application. However, if within 72 hours, the alleged infringing material is not removed from the website of the defendant No. 1 as also from the platforms of third parties, the plaintiff would be at its liberty to again approach this Court.

    9. Learned counsel for the defendant No. 1, during the course of arguments stated that the defendant No. 1 has actually purchased the licences from a third party in respect of the plaintiff's copyright material. Defendant No. 1, on affidavit will disclose the identity and contact details/addresses of the said third party who is issuing the licences on behalf of the plaintiff as also the copy of the licence agreements which the defendant No. 1 claims to have obtained from the third party. The defendant No. 1 along with its written statement and reply affidavit to the application will also file its statement of accounts w.e.f. 16th August, 2019 in a sealed cover in respect of its earnings from the use of various SAP software programmes."

4. The said injunction which was granted on the said date i.e., prayer A, B and C reads as under:

    "(a) An order of permanent injunction restraining the Defendant No. 1, its directors/partners/ proprietors, officers, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on its behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, from hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public and/or communicating to the public, or facilitating the same, in any manner/ through online platforms including website of D

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top