JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Geeta Publishing House challenging the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the learned District Judge, Commercial Cour-09 (Central District), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on application filed by the appellant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) by stating in paragraphs 13 to 16, as under:-

“13. The present suit, for declaration, permanent injunction and rendition of accounts has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendants with the averment that the parties entered into memorandum of agreement dated 12.10.2006 for the exclusive rights of publishing of books of business studies for class XI and XII written by the plaintiff for the academic year 2007- 2008 onwards but the said agreement was terminated by the plaintiff vide legal notice dated 29.12.2019. Hence, the present suit has been filed for seeking decree of declaration to the effect that the defendants have no right over the books of the subject in question written by the plaintiff and for restraining the defendants to publish or to sell the said books authored or written by the plaintiff with other reliefs as contained therein.

14. The factum of receipt of said legal notice of the plaintiff dated 29.12.2019 has been admitted by the applicant/defendant to which it also sent its reply dated 07.01.2020.

15. When the said memorandum of agreement dated 12.10.2006 has been terminated by the plaintiff vide legal notice dated 29.12.2019, prima facie there is nothing for this court to interfere with the impugned order dated 06.03.2020. The contentions raised by Id. Counsel for the applicant relating to absence of averment in the plaint about the earlier suit filed by the defendant, concealment by the plaintiff about the reply of the defendant dated 07.01.2020, deficiency in statement of truth filed along with plaint, verification by the plaintiff regarding the royalty statement and that the plaintiff himself had committed breach of the agreement dated 12.10.2006 are all matter of trial.

16. The applicant/defendant has failed to show that the plaintiff has made a false and misleading statement in relation to a material particular to justify the discharge /vary /set aside the impugned order dated 06.03.2020.”

2. Suffice to state that the application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC was filed seeking vacation of order dated 06.03.2020 passed by the Court on an application filed by the respondent/plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC whereby the learned District Judge has granted the stay order in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. Vide the order, the learned District Judge has restrained the appellant herein to publish, sell, revise, edit, circulate and advertise book of the subject ‘Business Studies’ for class 11 and 12 or any other book authored or written by the respondent/plaintiff till further orders.

3. The case of the respondent/plaintiff in the suit is primarily seeking declaration, permanent injunction and rendition of accounts against the appellant based on the memorandum of agreement dated 12.10.2006 for exclusive rights of publishing of books of ‘Business Studies’ for the class 11 and 12 written by the respondent for the academic year 2007-08 on the ground that the said agreement has been terminated vide legal notice dated 29.12.2019 and as such, the appellant/defendant does not have any right over the books in question written by the respondent/plaintiff.

4. The learned District Judge noting the fact that the receipt of the legal notice dated 29.12.2019 has been admitted by the appellant, to which the reply was also sent by the appellant on 07.01.2020, has granted the interim relief.

5. On the application filed by the appellant under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC, the learned District Judge by stating that the averments in respect of the suit filed by the appellant having been concealed by the respondent/plaintiff and the fact that respondent/plaintiff hi