Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M/S Eaglesight Media Private Limited ... vs Google Llc on 22 September, 2025
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(@ SLP(C) No. 20905/2025)
M/S EAGLESIGHT MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (ESMPL) APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
GOOGLE LLC & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The short issue that arises for consideration is as to whether the High Court is right in setting aside the injunction order under challenge before it, only on the premise that the contesting respondent(s) before us were not heard by the Trial Court.
3. The fact remains that the appellant had earlier filed a suit against the contesting respondent(s) and had Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by obtained an order of injunction against them which has SWETA BALODI Date: 2025.09.26 18:19:27 IST Reason: attained finality, as of now. Notwithstanding the said order, the defendants in the present suit are not giving 2 effect to it and that is the reason why the present suit has been filed. Therefore, the cause of action in the present suit is with respect to the failure on the part of the defendants in giving effect to the earlier order of injunction obtained against the contesting respondent(s) before us.
4. In such view of the matter, there is no question of hearing the contesting respondent(s) in the suit filed subsequently which is in fact meant to only give effect to the earlier order of injunction which has already attained finality.
5. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the High Court requires interference. Accordingly, the same stands set aside. Consequently, the order injunction of the Trial Court stands restored. However, we make it clear that our order will not have any bearing on the Special Leave Petition filed by the appellant with respect to the question of jurisdiction.
6. We also take note of the fact that respondent Nos.1 and 2 who are defendants in the present suit have complied with the order of the Trial Court.
7. We also take note of the fact that respondent Nos.3, 5 and 8 are neither proper nor necessary parties. Therefore, they are directed to be deleted from the array of defendants in the suit.
3
8. The appeal stands allowed, accordingly.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
…………………………………………………………………J. [M.M. SUNDRESH] ……………………………………………………………J. [SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA] NEW DELHI;
22nd SEPTEMBER, 2025
4
ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.6 SECTION IV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 20905/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-06-2025 in WP No. 13365/2025 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru] M/S EAGLESIGHT MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (ESMPL) Petitioner(s) VERSUS GOOGLE LLC & ORS. Respondent(s) [ONLY IA NO. 196623/2025 IS LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM] IA No. 180582/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 180585/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 22-09-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA For Petitioner(s) Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv.
Mr. Prince Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Naman Dutt, Adv.
Ms. Shloka Narayanan, AOR Mr. Uday Dube, Sr. Adv.
Mr. C.m.angadi, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Varun Pathak, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Shroff, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 5 Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SWETA BALODI) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)