Allowed

Monad Edukasional Society and Anr. v. Web Iq Domains Solutions Pvt.Ltd and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC25 Apr 2016NMS/1100/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an absentia notice of motion under a civil suit concerning copyright infringement and domain name misuse, the court made the motion absolute, confirming previously granted interim injunctions and a directive to deregister a specific domain name.

What did the court decide?

Notice of Motion made absolute confirming leave to sue under Order I Rule 8 and Section 151 CPC; interim order to deregister domain www.monadedu.in.

Monad Edukasional Society and Anr. Vs Web Iq Domains… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

205-NMS1100-16.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1100 OF 2016

¶4

IN

¶5

SUIT NO. 325 OF 2016

¶6

Monad Edukasional Society & Another…Plaintiffs
Versus

¶7

WEB IQ Domains Solutions Private Limited & 4 …Defendants
Others

¶8

Ms. Ravina Rajpal, with Ms. Ekta Asrani, i/b Singh & Singh,
Malhotra & Hegde, for the Plaintiffs.
None for the Defendant.

¶9

CORAM:G.S. PATEL, J
DATED:25th April 2016

¶10

PC:-

¶11

1.The Defendants are absent yet again. In my order dated 11th
April 2016, I noted inter alia that the Defendants, though served
were absent. Defendants Nos. 1 and 4, both Mumbai-based, had
been served. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were deemed to have been
served since they refused service.

¶12

2.At that time, I had noted Ms. Rajpal had correctly pointed
out the manner in which the Defendants had constantly avoided
service. I reinstated the previous ad-interim order of 15th October

¶13

1 of 4

¶14

205-NMS1100-16.DOC

¶15

2015 and granted further time to file Replies and Rejoinders. I also
made clear that I would not further adjourn the matter beyond
today on any count.

¶16

3.The matter is shown at Serial No. 205 on the weekly board.
For this week, when IPR matters have been taken, it is the weekly
board that is being followed.

¶17

4.The matter is called out at about 4.35 p.m. None appears for
the Defendants. In view thereof, and for the reasons stated in the
order dated 15th October 2015, the Notice of Motion is made
absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (d) and (f), being reliefs
previously granted. In addition, there will be an interim order in
terms of prayer clause (e) in relation to illicit use by the Defendants
of the domain name www.monadedu.in. For convenience, prayer
clauses (a) to (f) are set out below:

¶18

“(a) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon’ble Court grant leave to the Plaintiffs to sue the Defendants in a representative capacity either under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and/or Section 151 thereof and/or principles analogous thereto and/or on the well-recognized “John Doe” principles of doctrine;

¶19

(b) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant an injunction restraining the Defendants and/or their partners and/or proprietors and/or directors and/or shareholders and/or officers and/or servants

¶20

2 of 4

¶21

205-NMS1100-16.DOC

¶22

and/or agents and/or the representatives and/or franchisees and/or nominees and other known and unknown parties from infringing the Plaintiffs’ copyright in its Monad University mark/device being Exhibit “D1” and “D2”, by the use of www.mondad.edu.in or an identical and/or deceptively similar mark;

¶23

(c) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant an injunction restraining the Defendants and/or their partners and/or proprietors and/or directors and/or shareholders and/or officers and/or servants and/or agents and/or the representatives and/or franchisees and/or nominees and other known and unknown parties from infringing and/or passing off the the Plaintiffs’ Monad University mark/device being Exhibit “D1” and “D2”, by the use of www.mondad.edu.in or an identical and/or deceptively similar mark;

¶24

(d) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant an injunction restraining the Defendants and/or their partners and/or proprietors and/or directors and/or shareholders and/or officers and/or servants and/or agents and/or the representatives and/or franchisees and/or nominees and other known and unknown parties from passing off their degrees and/or services as and for that of the Plaintiffs;

¶25

3 of 4

¶26

205-NMS1100-16.DOC

¶27

(e) that pending the hearing and final disposal of this Suit, this Hon’ble Court direct Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 and/or their servants and/or agents and/or any persons claiming through and/or under such Defendants to deregister and/or cancel the impugned domain name viz. www.monadedu.in and thereby injunct such Defendants from registering any other domain name which is identical and/or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs’ domain names viz. www.monad.edu.in and www.monaduniversity.com;

¶28

(f) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon’ble Court by an order be pleased to direct the concerned police stations to render the necessary assistance to the Plaintiffs in restraining the Defendants from violating and/or infringing the Plaintiffs’ copyright and/or common law rights;”

¶29

5. It is further clarified that prayer clause (a) is merely been confirmed. It sought reliefs under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. That relief was already granted.

¶30

6.The Notice of Motion is disposed of in these terms, with
costs to be recovered at the final hearing of the suit.

¶31

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶32

4 of 4

Monad Edukasional Society and Anr. v. Web Iq Domains Solutions Pvt.Ltd and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monad Edukasional Society and Anr. v. Web Iq Domains Solutions Pvt.Ltd and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Raju Jadhav Vs Raju Sambhaji Jadhav.....Deceased.

Sanjay Ravindranathan Vs Vijay Ravindranathan (Deceased)

Satish Krishna Kamath Vs Siddharth Satish Kamath ( Minor)

Venkatesh Eswaran of Thane Vs Neema Venkatesh (Deceased)

Anju Virendra Kumar Sharma and Anr. Vs Shorabh Virendra Kumar Sharma (Caveator)

Rajanikant Narayanbhai Patel Vs Yogeshkumar N. Patel (Caveator)