The court dismissed a civil suit filed for permanent injunction and account of profits regarding computer software infringement after the parties settled the issue but failed to produce the Memorandum of Compromise in court.
Liberty granted to plaintiff to institute a fresh suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 17.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
C.S.No. 610 of 2002
L.B. Thiyagarajan ... Plaintiff
Vs.
1. M/s. Astor Technologies,
No.14, Readymade Garment Complex,
Thiru-vi-ka Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
Represented by its Partner Mr.S. Vasudevan,
2. Vasudevan
3. K.Ravi ... Defendants
Prayer: Civil Suit is filed under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC r/w Order V Rule 1 of O.S.Rules along with Counter claim under Order VIII Rule 6A and 6B
of CPC., (a) a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and the partners of the first defendant, their men, agents, servants, or any one
claiming through them from in any manner infringing the copyright vested
on the plaintiff in the computer software CAD/CAM for garment manufacturing technology created and invented and developed by the
plaintiff.
2
(b) a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and the partners
of the first defendant, their men, agents, servants, or any one claiming through them from in any manner passing off of the computer software CAD/CAM for garment manufacturing technology developed by the plaintiff
either by sale or installation or in any manner advertising the same;
(c) Directing the defendants to surrender to the plaintiff the Computer seized by defendants illegally together with CPU, Key board, floppies, CD Rom and other materials or things including the source code of CAD software which is under the defendants possession or in the custody of the police.
(d) Directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of the
Profits earned by them from the beginning through the sale of the computer software created, developed and promoted by the plaintiff and directing the
payment of such profits earned by them to the plaintiff.
3
(e) Directing the defendants to pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
For Plaintiff : Mr.A.Prabhakara Reddy
For Defendants : Mr.Chandhira Pradeep Kumar
-----
J U D G M E N T
Heard Mr.A.Prabhakara Reddy, learned Counsel for the plaintiff and
Mr.Chandhira Pradeep Kumar, learned Counsel for the defendant.
2. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff stating that the parties had settled the issue between themselves. However, the Memorandum of Compromise is not available in the Court bundle and the learned counsels
stated that they could not contact their respective .
3. The suit is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the
plaintiff to institute a fresh suit with respect to the Copyright in the computer software CAD/CAM used for Garment Manufacturing Technology either against the defendants or against anybody acting under the defendants or
4
against any third party if a fresh cause of action arises.
5
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
msm
C.S.No. 610 of 2002
17.03.2021
M/s. Astor Technologies
Vasudevan
K.Ravi
C.V.Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
