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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 47173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tejas Karia, J
KENVUE BRANDS LLC & ANR. VS. RSPL LIMITED
CS(COMM) 1365/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pravin Anand, Shantanu Sahay, Manvi Panwar
For the Respondents:

Grant of ex-parte ad-interim injunction and appointment of Local Commissioners in software copyright infringement cases where a prima facie case is established and there is a risk of evidence destruction.

Headnote:The case involves the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The plaintiffs, owners of a 3D CAD/CAM software, alleged that the defendants used pirated and unauthorized versions of the software on multiple computer systems for commercial purposes, as evidenced by infringement reports and an independent investigator's findings. The court found a prima facie case of copyright infringement and noted that the defendants had previously admitted to unauthorized use but continued the activity. The primary issue was whether an ex-parte ad-interim injunction and the appointment of Local Commissioners were warranted to prevent further infringement and the destruction of digital evidence. The court reasoned that the defendants' continued unauthorized use despite repeated attempts at amicable resolution, combined with the imminent likelihood of concealing digital footprints, justified urgent relief to protect the plaintiffs' goodwill and reputation. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, it is directed that the Defendants, their principal officers, directors, agents, franchisees, servants and all others acting for and on their behalf, are restrained from directly or indirectly using / accessing / installing / reproducing / distributing any pirated / unlicensed / unauthorized programs of the Plaintiffs’ Software amounting to infringement of the Plaintiffs’ Copyright subsisting in the Plaintiff’s Software, and from formatting / erasing any data pertaining to the Plaintiffs’ Software available with the Defendants.

Table of Content
1. handling of preliminary procedural applications in commercial suits. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
2. establishing copyright infringement through technical reports and independent investigation. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)
3. requirements for granting ex-parte ad-interim injunctions in ip cases. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
4. appointment of local commissioners to preserve digital evidence and seize infringing software. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)

O R D E R

I.A. 31879/2025 (Exemption from pre-institution Mediation)

1. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiffs seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation Mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (“CC Act”).

2. As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi , 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1382, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution Mediation is granted.

3. The Application stands disposed of.

I.A. 31880/2025 (Exemption)

4. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

5. The Application stands disposed of.

I.A. 31878/2025 (Exemption from advance service to the Defendants)

6. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiffs under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), seeking exemption from advance service to the Defendant.

7. Mr. Pravin Anand, learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs, submitted that there is a real and imminent likelihood that the Defendant may take immediate steps to dispose of, conceal or suppress its infringing business operations and digital footprints.

8. In view of the fact that the Plaintiffs have sought an urgent ex-parte ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of Local Commissioners, the exemption from advance service to the Defendants is granted.

9. The Application stands disposed of.

I.A. 31877/2025 (seeking leave to file audio recording in pen drive)

10. This Application has been filed by Plaintiffs seeking permission to place on record pen drive containing audio recording of Defendants’ infringing activities.

11. In facts and circumstances as stated in the Application, the same is allowed. The pen drive be taken on record.

12. Accordingly, the Application stands disposed of.

13. Let the Plaint be registered as a Suit.

14. Issue Summons. Let the Summons be served to the Defendants through all permissible modes upon filing of the Process Fee.

15. The Summons shall state that the Written Statements shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days from the date of the receipt of Summons. Along with the Written Statements, the Defendants shall also file an Affidavit of Admission / Denial of the documents of the Plaintiffs, without which the Written Statements shall not be taken on record.

16. Liberty is granted to the Plaintiffs to file Replications, if any, within 30 days from the receipt of the Written Statements. Along with the Replications filed by the Plaintiffs, an Affidavit of Admission / Denial of the documents of Defendants be filed by the Plaintiffs, without which the Replications shall not be taken on record.

17. In case any Party is placing reliance on a document, which is not in their power and possession, its details and source shall be mentioned in the list of reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings.

18. If any of the Parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same shall be sought and given within the prescribed timelines.

19. List before the learned Joint Registrar on 19.02.2026 for completion of service and pleadings.

I.A. 31876/2025 (O-XI R-1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908)

20. The present Application has been filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs under Order XI Rule 1(4) of the CPC as applicable to Commercial Suits under the CC Act seeking leave to place on record additional documents.

21. The Plaintiffs are permitted to file additional documents in a

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