Allowed

Cleartrip Private Limited v. My Travel Genie C/O Spin Travels Services Private Limited and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC20 Oct 2016NMS/2162/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court decreed a suit stemming from copyright, artistic work, literary works, and trade dress infringement regarding travel websites. The defendants submitted to the prayer clauses and undertook to modify their website within a specified timeframe. The court accepted the undertakings and decreed the suit with the changes to be implemented by December 8, 2016, effective from December 9, 2016.

What did the court decide?

The suit was decreed and the website modifications were to be carried out by 8th December 2016, operative from 9th December 2016. Also, the offending portions of the website were to be blacked out by

Cleartrip Private Limited Vs My Travel Genie C/O Spin… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

904-S637-15+.DOC

¶2

ATUL

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 637 OF 2015

¶4

WITH

¶5

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2162 OF 2016

¶6

Cleartrip Private Limited…Plaintiffs
Versus
My Travel Genie, C/o. Spin Travels Services …Defendants
Private Limited & 2 others

¶7

Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rohan Kadam,
Mr. Sanjay Kadam, Mr. Sanjil Kadam, Ms. Sayalee Rajpurkar
& Mr. Deeak Enakphale, i/b Kadam & Co., for the Plaintiffs.
Mr. Vishal Kanade, with Mr. Shubro Dey, i/b Sutapa Saha, for
Defendants Nos. 2 and 3.

¶8

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 20th October 2016

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1.The 3rd Defendant, Mr. Raj Jayendra Kapadia is personally
present in Court. He is a director of Defendant No. 1, Spin Travel
Services Private Limited, the owner and operator of the travel
website www.mytravelgenie.com. He instructs Mr. Kanade to state
that the Defendants accept that the Plaintiff is the owner and is
exclusively entitled to all the copyright in the artistic works, literary

¶11

Page 1 of 3

¶12

20th October 2016

¶13

904-S637-15+.DOC

¶14

works, trade dress and materials referred to in Exhibits “K” and
“L” to the Plaint.

¶15

2.On behalf of all three Defendants, Mr. Kapadia submits to a
decree in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of the Plaint. In view of
this, Mr. Tulzapurkar for the Plaintiff does not press his claim for
damages.

¶16

3.In addition, the Defendants agree and undertake to carry out
the necessary changes in their website www.mytravelgenie.com in
accordance with the two proposals that are annexed as Annexures
“A1” and “A2” to the draft Minutes of Order, which I am taking on
record and marked “X” for identification. The Plaintiff confirms
that it has no objection to these changes as set out Annexures “A1”
and “A2” being used and deployed on the Defendants’ website/s.

¶17

4.The Defendants agree and undertake to carry out these
changes on their website by 8th December 2016. The foregoing
decree in paragraph 2 above shall, therefore, operate on and from
9th December 2016.

¶18

5.Mr. Kanade is also instructed to say that in the meantime, the
offending portions of the Defendants’ website have already been
blacked out. If not, this will be done in the course of next ten days,
i.e., by 27th October 2016.

¶19

6.All the undertakings mentioned above are accepted as
undertakings to the Court.

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

20th October 2016

¶22

904-S637-15+.DOC

¶23

7. The Suit is decreed in the foregoing terms. Drawn up decree dispensed with.

¶24

8. Refund of court fee in accordance with the Rules.

¶25

9. The Suit and the Notice of Motion are both disposed of in above terms.

¶26

10. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶27

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶28

Page 3 of 3

¶29

20th October 2016

Cleartrip Private Limited v. My Travel Genie C/O Spin Travels Services Private Limited and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cleartrip Private Limited v. My Travel Genie C/O Spin Travels Services Private Limited and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mega Bollywood Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S Hawa Valves (India) Pvt.Ltd. Vs M/S Hawa Engineers Ltd.

Jayshree Vasan Vs Vimla Shah

Jagdish G. Kamath and 5 Ors. Vs Lime and Chilli Hospitality Services

Lumenpulse Lighting Inc. Vs Lumenpulse Lighting Technologies Respresented by Abhay Shah

Pidilite Industries Limited Vs Poma-Ex Products and 15 Ors.