The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case of copyright infringement, while defendants claimed fair use and truth defenses for defamation, necessitating a trial to assess merits.

ORDER

I.A.14238/2021 (by the plaintiff u/S 151 CPC for filing additional documents)

1. The application has been moved by the plaintiff along with the suit seeking leave to file additional documents within 30 days, as the suit had been filed for urgent relief.

2. In the interest of justice, the application is allowed.

3. The application stands disposed of.

I.A.14296/2021 (by the plaintiff u/S 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation)

4. The application has been moved by the plaintiff along with the suit seeking exemption from exhausting the remedy of pre-institution mediation.

5. Mr. Saurabh Kirpal, learned senior counsel for the defendants No.1 to 9, had raised an objection that the suit is not a `commercial suit'. If that be so, the application would be unnecessary. However, since the suit has been filed as a `commercial suit' and in view of the fact that the urgent reliefs of injunction against infringement of copyright has been sought, the application is allowed and the plaintiff is exempted from exhausting the remedy of the pre-institution mediation.

6. The application stands disposed of.

I.A.14964/2021 (by the plaintiff u/O VII Rule 10 CPC to file additional documents) and I.A.37/2022 (by the plaintiff u/O VII Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC seeking permission to file additional documents)

7. These applications have been filed by the plaintiff seeking permission to place on the record, the transcripts of the videos, in respect of which, the plaintiff has sought relief, which are allegedly containing infringing material and defamatory/derogatory material against the plaintiff.

8. The objection raised by the learned senior counsel for the defendants No.1 to 9 was that neither provision was applicable. However, since the videos have been produced before the court, the transcripts would only assist the court, for which reason the plaintiff is allowed to place the same on the record. Accordingly, these transcripts are taken as part of the record, subject to any objection that the defendants may raise in respect of the correctness of the transcripts during trial, as such a comparison is not possible at this stage.

9. The application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

I.A.1055/2022 (by the plaintiff u/O XI Rule 1 CPC as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking leave to file additional documents)

10. The application has been moved by the plaintiff under Order XI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, "CPC") as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 seeking permission to place on record additional documents, namely, screenshots of the tweets/posts appearing on the websites of the defendant No.11 i.e., www.facebook.com and www.instagram.com and the website of the defendant No.12 i.e., www.twitter.com, as listed in the plaint, allegedly containing defamatory/infringing content.

11. Since these are only screenshots of details already listed in the plaint, in the interest of justice, as it would only assist the court in appreciating the contents as to whether they contain infringing/defamatory mate