Case Note & Summary
The appeal arises from an order of a Learned Single Judge making absolute a motion for interim relief in a suit based on infringement of copyright. The plaintiff, Indiana Gratings Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit alleging infringement of its copyright in 126 industrial drawings (Exhibit G) used for manufacturing electroforged grating machines. The defendants include a company controlled by the Kanade family (First Defendant), a partnership firm (Second Defendant), former employees (Defendants 4-7), and fabricators (Defendants 13-23). The plaintiff claimed that former employees resigned and joined the First Defendant, and upon a police complaint, the plaintiff's drawings were found in the custody of the First Defendant and some fabricators. A Notice of Motion for interim relief was taken out, and on 26 June 2008, a Learned Single Judge found prima facie merit and passed an injunction restraining the defendants from using the plaintiff's drawings mentioned in Exhibit G and thereby infringing the copyright or making any three-dimensional objects of machine parts which would be a reproduction of the plaintiff's drawings. Subsequently, a fresh motion was taken out alleging that the First Defendant continued to infringe despite the injunction. The court upheld the interim injunction, finding prima facie case and balance of convenience in favor of the plaintiff.
Headnote
A) Copyright Law - Infringement of Artistic Work - Industrial Drawings - Copyright Act, 1957, Sections 14, 51 - The plaintiff sought interim relief against defendants for alleged infringement of copyright in 126 industrial drawings used for manufacturing electroforged grating machines. The court found prima facie merit and granted an injunction restraining defendants from using the drawings or making three-dimensional objects reproducing them. Held that industrial drawings are artistic works protected under copyright law and reproduction in any form, including three-dimensional, constitutes infringement (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendants from infringing its copyright in industrial drawings by reproducing them in three-dimensional form.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the Learned Single Judge granting interim injunction is upheld.
Law Points
- Copyright in artistic work includes industrial drawings
- reproduction in three-dimensional form constitutes infringement
- interim injunction can be granted on prima facie case and balance of convenience
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (11) 41
APPEAL NO.1044 OF 2010 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1263 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.3094 OF 2005 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2952 OF 2010
DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, ANOOP V. MOHTA
Mr.V.R.Dhond with Mr. N.C.Parekh and Ms.Bhavna Sinde i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Appellant; Dr.Virendra Tulzapurkar, Senior Advocate with Mr.Shriraj Dhruv and Ms.RanjuYadav i/b. Dhru & Co. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Kanade Anand Udyog Pvt. Ltd.
Indiana Gratings Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against an order granting interim injunction in a copyright infringement suit.
Remedy Sought
The plaintiff sought an interim injunction restraining the defendants from infringing its copyright in industrial drawings.
Filing Reason
Alleged infringement of copyright in 126 industrial drawings by the defendants, including former employees and fabricators.
Previous Decisions
A Learned Single Judge on 26 June 2008 passed an injunction restraining the defendants from using the plaintiff's drawings. A fresh motion was taken out alleging continued infringement.
Issues
Whether the plaintiff has a prima facie case for copyright infringement in industrial drawings.
Whether the balance of convenience lies in favor of granting interim injunction.
Submissions/Arguments
Plaintiff argued that its copyright in 126 industrial drawings was infringed by defendants, including former employees who joined the First Defendant and fabricators who were supplied the drawings.
Defendants opposed the injunction, but the court found prima facie merit in plaintiff's case.
Ratio Decidendi
Industrial drawings are artistic works protected under the Copyright Act, 1957. Reproduction of such drawings in three-dimensional form constitutes infringement. On a prima facie case and balance of convenience, an interim injunction can be granted to restrain such infringement.
Judgment Excerpts
The action by the Plaintiff is founded on an alleged infringement of its copyright in artistic work. The artistic work in the present case consists of Industrial Drawings.
By an order dated 26 June 2008, a Learned Single Judge of this Court found prima facie merit in the contention of the Plaintiff.
Procedural History
The plaintiff filed Suit No.3094 of 2005 for copyright infringement. A Notice of Motion for interim relief was taken out, and on 26 June 2008, a Learned Single Judge granted an injunction. Subsequently, a fresh motion (Notice of Motion No.2952 of 2010) was taken out alleging continued infringement. The Learned Single Judge made the motion absolute. The defendants appealed (Appeal No.1044 of 2010). The Division Bench dismissed the appeal on 23 November 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Copyright Act, 1957: 14, 51
