Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 13051
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J
F HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD & ANR VS. REDDY'S LABORATORIES LTD & ANR
CS(COMM) 984/2024 | I.A. 14511/2026 | I.As. 44322/2024 | 6695/2025 | 6241/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pravin Anand, Manvi Panwar
For the Respondents: Rishub Kapoor
A copyright infringement suit regarding software piracy can be resolved through an amicable settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC, where the defendant acknowledges IP rights and procures genuine licenses.
Headnote:The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from using pirated or unlicensed software programs, specifically Microstation, alleging copyright infringement. During the pendency of the suit, the parties filed a joint application under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to record an amicable settlement. The defendants acknowledged the plaintiffs' intellectual property rights, agreed to procure 19 Microstation Virtuoso subscriptions, and paid a sum of INR 24,42,466. The primary issue was whether the settlement terms reached between the parties were lawful and could be recorded as a decree. The court observed that the terms of the settlement, including the procurement of genuine software and the undertaking to refrain from further infringement, were lawful and acceptable. Suit is decreed in terms of settlement between the parties, which shall form a part of the decree and needless to state bind the parties thereto.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties in a copyright infringement suit may resolve disputes through a settlement involving the procurement of genuine software licenses. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the court may record and allow a settlement application if the terms are found to be lawful. (Para 4) |
| 3. a suit can be decreed in terms of a settlement, leading to the disposal of the case and potential refund of court fees. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
$~83
*
O R D E R
I.A. 14511/2026
1. This application is jointly filed on behalf of Plaintiffs and Defendants under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC for recording of settlement between parties.
2. This suit is instituted on behalf of the Plaintiffs inter alia seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining Defendants and all others acting on their behalf from directly or indirectly copying, reproducing, storing, installing and/or using pirated/unlicensed software program of Plaintiff No. 1 including but not limited to Microstation and its various versions or any other software programs developed by Plaintiffs in any manner that may amount to infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyright subsisting in its software programs and software related documentation.
3. During the pendency of the suit, parties have settled their inter se disputes and terms of settlement are incorporated in paragraph 1 of the application and are extracted hereinunder for ready reference:-
“1. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants abovenamed have amicably settled the present dispute without delving into the merits and the subject matter of the suit CS (Comm) No. 984 of 2024. The settlement is in the following terms and conditions:
a. The Defendants acknowledge that the Plaintiffs are the owner of all intellectual property rights subsisting in their various software programs, especially but not limited to SolidWorks software and the Defendants undertake to use genuine/authorized versions of the Plaintiffs’ software programs.
b. The Defendants have agreed to procure the below-mentioned software program as part of the Settlement:
| Type and Versions of the software Programs | Quantity |
| Microstation Virtuoso Subscription | 19 |
c. The Defendants have already raised the purchase order bearing order number MAPE/PO/012/25-26 dated 17 February 2026 to Plaintiff No.2 in respect of the software program mentioned in the table above. Copy of the said Purchase Order issued to the Plaintiffs is annexed herewith as Annexure- A.
d. The Defendants have paid the sum of INR 24,42,466/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Forty-Two Thousand Four Hundred Sixty-Six Rupees) inclusive of taxes, via Bank transfer bearing UTR No. CIUBH26066412183 - 2442467 on 07.03.2026 to Plaintiff No. 2 towards procurement of the aforesaid software programs of the Plaintiffs.
e. Pursuant thereto, on 09.03.2026, Plaintiff No. 2 issued a tax invoice acknowledging and confirming receipt of the aforesaid payment made by the Defendants and the 19 software licences were duly issued to the Defendants. The Plaintiffs further undertake that the licences so issued shall remain valid and fully functional for the entire period for which they have been granted, save where their use is not in accordance with the End User License Agreement (EULA) executed between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants (Pls see Clause 18 of the EULA - Termination). A copy of the invoice dated 09.03.2026 is annexed hereto as Annexure-B.
f. The Plaintiffs shall not revoke or cancel the subscriptions granted to the Defendants so long as the Defendants remain in compliance with the terms of the EULA. In the event of any revocation or cancellation prior to the expiry of the licence period, and not in accordance with the EULA, the Plaintiffs shall be liable to refund the entire amount paid towards the licences, together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.
g. The Defendants agree that the Defendants and their agents, franchisees, servants, and all others acting on their behalf, will refrain from directly or
