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) 5644

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Jainemo Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Rahul Shah & Ors. - Respondents
CS(COMM) No. 676 of 2023 and I.As. 18922 of 2023, 18923 of 2023, 18924 of 2023, 18925 of 2023, 18926 of 2023, 18927 of 2023, 18928 of 2023
Decided On : 27-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Karan Bajaj, Mr. Rupin Bahl and Ms. Pooja Arora, Advocates (M-9891098822), Advocates, for the Plaintiff

IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes the legal principle that unauthorized dissemination of copyrighted material on digital platforms constitutes copyright infringement, and digital platforms have a responsibility to disclose details of infringing activities and take necessary actions to prevent further infringement.

Headnote:

Exemption - Commercial Courts Act - [Section 12A, Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC] - The court allowed exemption from filing original documents, additional documents, advance service to the Defendants, and pre-litigation mediation under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018. The court also granted permission to file documents on a pen drive and directed the registration of the plaint as a suit.

Fact of the Case:

The Plaintiff, M/s Jainemo Private Limited, sought relief against unauthorized dissemination of its educational course material on various digital platforms by multiple Defendants and platforms.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Plaintiff's copyrighted course material was being unlawfully disseminated on digital platforms, leading to a prima facie case of copyright infringement. The court granted an injunction restraining the Defendants from further dissemination of the Plaintiff's copyrighted material.

Issues: Unauthorized dissemination of copyrighted educational material, infringement on digital platforms, and the liability of platforms for infringing activities.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Plaintiff's copyrighted material qualified for protection under the Copyright Act, 1957, and any unauthorized distribution or communication would amount to copyright infringement. The court also emphasized the responsibility of digital platforms to disclose details of infringing channels/devices and take necessary actions to prevent further infringement.

Final Decision: The court granted an injunction restraining the Defendants from downloading, uploading, storing, sharing, transmitting, or utilizing any of the Plaintiff's course material on electronic and digital platforms, and directed the platforms to take specific actions to block infringing channels and disclose details of infringing activities.

ORDER

Prathiba M. Singh, J. - This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

I.A. 18924/2023 (for exemption)

2. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption from filing originals/cleared/certified/translated copies of documents with proper margins, etc. Original documents shall be produced/filed at the time of Admission/Denial, if sought, strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

3. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

I.A. 18923/2023 (for additional documents)

4. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking leave to file additional documents under the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter, 'Commercial Courts Act'). The Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the DHC (Original Side) Rules, 2018.

5. Accordingly, application is disposed of.

I.A. 18925/2023 (exemption from advance service to the Defendants)

6. In view of the fact that the Plaintiff has sought an urgent ex parte ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of the Local Commissioner, the exemption from advance service to the Defendant is granted.

7. Accordingly, application is disposed of.

I.A. 18926/2023 (u/S 12A of the Commercial Courts Act)

8. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff seeking exemption instituting pre-litigation mediation. Since the Plaintiff seeks an urgent ex-parte injunction, in view of the orders passed in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R A Perfumery Works Private Ltd, 2022/DHC/004454, the application is allowed and disposed of.

I.A. 18927/2023 (for court fee)

9. This is an application seeking extension of time for filing the court fee. The court fee is stated to have been deposited with the treasury. Let the same be filed within two weeks. Application is disposed of.

I.A. 18928/2023 (permission to file documents on a pen drive)

10. This is an application seeking permission to file course material on a pen drive and in a sealed cover. The course material on pen-drive be filed on record and annexed with the electronic record of the Court. The said material be filed in a sealed cover and be retained on record without scanning. Application is disposed of.

CS(COMM) 676/2023

11. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

12. Issue summons to the Defendants through all modes upon filing of Process Fee.

13. Ld. Counsels for Defendant Nos.16, 19, 20 and 28 accepts summons.

14. The summons to the Defendants shall indicate that the written statement to the plaint shall be positively filed within 30 days from date of receipt of summons. Along with the written statement, the Defendants shall also file an affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without which the written statement shall not be taken on record.

15. Liberty is given to the Plaintiff to file the replication within 15 days of the receipt of the written statement(s). Along with the replication, if any, filed by the Plaintiff, an affidavit of admission/denial of documents of the Defendant, be filed by the Plaintiff, without which the replication shall not be taken on record. If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the timelines.

16. List before the Joint Registrar for marking of exhibits on 22nd November, 2023. It is made clear that any party unjustifiably denying documents would be liable to be burdened with costs.

17. List before Court on 22nd March, 2024.

I.A. 18922/2023 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC)

18. Issue notice.

19. Ld. Counsels for Defendant Nos.16, 19, 20 and 28 accept notice.

20. The Plaintiff in this suit is M/s Jainemo Private Limited, a company engaged in preparation and sale

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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