Bottom of Kind
Bombay Substantial Court
First Appeal No . 1076/20 vs Aged 26 Years, Occ.: Business upon 6 March, 2012 Bench: A. B. Chaudhari
you fa1076. eleven. odt
INSIDE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR ALONG WITH, NAGPUR INITIALLY APPEAL NUMBER 1076/2011
APPELLANT: - Dhiraj Dharamdas Dewani, Aged 26 years, Occ.: Business, Manager M/s Dewani Soft Incorporation. Office
situated at 303, 3rd Floor, Panjwani
Marketplace, Teen Nal Chowk, Itwari, Nagpur.
RESPONDENTS: -- 1 . M/s Sonal Information Systems Pvt. Ltd. through its Administrators. 1a) Suresh Mansukhlal Bothra,
aged adult, Occupation Business,
Director Sonal Info Systems
1b) Usha Suresh Bothra, Aged mature,
Occupation organization, Director
Sonal Info Devices Private Limited.
1c) Jatanbai Mansukhlal Bothra,
Aged mature, Occupation organization,
Director Sonal Info Devices
Directors (1a to 1c) c/o Office
at G-1, Ganga House, Gharpure
Ghat, Ashok Stambh, Nasik-422002.
Nos. 1a to 1c R/o Ridhi Siddhi
Apartment, Indankat, Panchavati,
----------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri U. D. Vyas, Adv. for appellant] [Shri K. V. Deshmukh, Adv. to get respdt. nos. 1 (a) to (c)] ----------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: A. B. CHAUDHARI, J. Date of arranging the common sense: 27. 01. 2012 Date of pronouncing the judgment: 06. goal. 2012 2 fa1076. eleven. odt L U G G M E And T
1 . Heard. Confess. Taken up for final removal with the permission of the learned Counsel pertaining to the rival parties. 2 . This appeal was adopted for last disposal together with the consent of the Counsel intended for the rival parties consideringg the fact that application beneath Order VII Rule eleven of the Code of Municipal Procedure registered by the respondent/defendant was allowed and consequently, the appellant asserted that he stands with no remedy. DETAILS
3. The appellant is a original individual, who filed Special Detrimental Suit Number 3/2010 in the Court of District Assess 5, Nagpur under Section 60 with the Copyright Action, 1957 intended for declaration and permanent injunction. He averred that he developed a software to facilitate the professionals just like Income Tax Supporters, Chartered Accountancy firm, Sales Tax professionals, Accountants inside their professional function. The objective is to facilitate automated preparation of return, namely form No . 231 to 324, to validate 'E- 3 fa1076. 11. odt returns' with inbuilt affirmation, utility and auto calculations facility and so forth amongst so many other features and programs developed inside the said computer software. It was refined since the yr 2005 and ultimately was launched on the market in the year 2007. The software shot to popularity in the market and consequently, the rivals of the individual including the respondents/defendants started creating obstacles in the marketing with the said merchandise. As a result of the intention in the respondents to obstruct the plaintiff from doing his business of promoting the stated product, the respondents submitted F. My spouse and i. R. with Police Place Nasik upon 30. 1 . 2010 which usually registered as Crime No . 3007/2010 below Sections 63 and 65 of the Copyright Act. Working on the said F. My spouse and i. R., Nasik police abruptly visited the premises of the plaintiff in 3. 2 . 2010 without any knowledge or intimation for the plaintiff and seized several materials by his workplace and went away. Even before the said actions and afterwards the respondents started dental campaign regarding the litigant's said merchandise falsely propagating that the merchandise was not great quality etc and so forth. The plaintiff having no alternate filed some fa1076. eleven. odt Exceptional Civil Fit No . 3/2010 on three or more. 3. 2010.
4. Afterwards, the respondents/defendants on up to 29. 3. 2010 filed a suit under Section 55 of the Copyright Act inside the Court for Nasik vide Civil Match No . 1/2010 and also obtained ex lado injunction upon 15. some. 2010 and upon overall look of the present plaintiff prior to the Nasik Courtroom and after ability to hear the celebrations, the said Court in 14. twelve. 2010 revoked the explained order of ex part injunction right up until the...