Delhi High Court - Orders
Dassault Systemes Solidworks Corp & Anr vs Mr Neeraj Sharma & Anr on 4 November, 2025
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 1175/2025 & I.As. 27279-85/2025
DASSAULT SYSTEMES SOLIDWORKS CORP & ANR.
.....Plaintiffs
Through: Mr. Shantanu Sahay, Mr. Aasish and
Ms. Manvi Panwar, Advocates
versus
MR NEERAJ SHARMA & ANR. .....Defendants
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
ORDER
% 04.11.2025 I.A. 27285/2025 (for exemption)
1. This is an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ['CPC'], seeking exemption from filing legible/typed copies of dim/illegible copies of documents.
2. Subject to the plaintiff filing the legible/typed copies of dim/illegible copies of documents sought to be relied upon within four (4) weeks from today, exemption is granted for the present.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27284/2025 (seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation)
4. This is an application under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 CPC, filed by the plaintiff seeking exemption from instituting pre-litigation mediation.
5. Having regard to the facts that the present suit contemplates urgent CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 1 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 interim relief and in light of the judgement of the Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi1, exemption from the requirement of pre- institution mediation is granted to the plaintiff.
6. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27283/2025 (seeking exemption from service to the defendants)
7. This is an application filed under Section 151 of the CPC on behalf of the plaintiff seeking exemption from service to the defendants.
8. In view of the fact that the plaintiff has sought an ex-parte ad-interim injunction along with the appointment of a Local Commissioner, the exemption from effecting advance service upon the defendants is granted.
9. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 27282/2025 (for seeking permission to file audio recording in pendrive)
10. This is an application under Section 151 of CPC filed by the Plaintiffs seeking permission to take the pen-drive on record containing video recording on the machine of the Plaintiffs showing the patented process.
11. The Plaintiff are directed to file the CD/pen-drive in accordance with the Rule 24 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
12. Registry may receive an electronic record on CD so long as it is encrypted with a hash value or in any other non-editable format. The video recording contained in the CD be placed in the electronic record of the present suit in a format that is non-editable, so that the same can be viewed by the court during the hearing.
13. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of. I.A. 27281/2025 (seeking leave to file additional documents)
14. This is an application seeking leave to file additional documents under 1 (2024) 5 SCC 815 CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 2 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 Order XI Rule 1(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') [as amended by the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 ('Commercial Courts Act')] read with Section 151 CPC, within thirty (30) days.
15. The Plaintiff, if it wishes to file additional documents will file the same within thirty (30) days from today, and it shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 ('DHC Rules').
16. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
17. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 1175/2025
18. The underlying suit has been filed by the Plaintiffs seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, passing of, rendition of accounts of profit, damages, and other ancillary reliefs.
19. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
20. Summons be issued to the defendants by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. An affidavit of service be filed within two (2) weeks.
21. The summons shall indicate that the written statements must be filed within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the summons. The defendants shall also file affidavits of admission/denial of the documents filed by the plaintiffs, failing which the written statements shall not be taken on record.
22. The plaintiffs are at liberty to file replications thereto within thirty (30) days after filing of the written statements. The replications shall be accompanied by affidavits of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by the defendants, failing which the replications shall not be taken on CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 3 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 record.
23. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.
24. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
25. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) for completion of service and pleadings, marking of exhibits and admission/denial of documents on 16.12.2025.
26. List before the Court on 10.04.2026.
I.A. 27279/2025 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)
27. This is an application filed under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on behalf of the plaintiff seeking interim injunction against the defendants.
28. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs sets up the Plaintiffs case as follows:
28.1. Plaintiff No.1 is a corporation existing under the laws of the USA, and is a sister concern of Dassault Systèmes, France. Plaintiff No.1 was established to manage all business and legal matters, including Intellectual Property Rights with respect to its software, which is the subject matter of the present suit, i.e., SOLIDWORKS.
28.2. Plaintiff No.2 is the wholly owned subsidiary of Dassault Systèmes, France, and a sister concern of Plaintiff No.1. Plaintiff No.1 carries on its business activities in India through Plaintiff No.2. 28.3. The Plaintiffs are widely known for developing three-dimensional ['3D'] simulation Computer-Aided Design ['CAD'], Computer-Aided Manufacturing ['CAM'], and Computer-Aided Engineering ['CAE']. These CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 4 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 software programs bring the entire process of designing, innovating, and manufacturing a product onto a computer system.
One such software program of the Plaintiffs is SOLIDWORKS ['Plaintiffs' Software program'], which is a CAD software aimed at modelling and simulating 3D solid products.
28.4. Plaintiff No.1 is the owner of the copyright in its software, i.e., SOLIDWORKS. All software programs and user instruction manuals in respect thereof are 'literary works' capable of protection under the Copyright Act, 1957 ['Act of 1957']. The said literary works have been created and written for the Plaintiffs by their own employee during the course of their employment with the Plaintiffs, and therefore, as per the doctrine of 'Work for hire', Plaintiff No. 1 is the 'first owner' of the said copyright as defined under the Act of 1957.
28.5. Plaintiffs operate based on a licensing system, wherein the customers acquire the right to use the software and not ownership. Plaintiffs' Software programs are licensed through internet delivery, during which process the customer agrees to the terms of the Customer License and Online Services Agreement ['CLOSA'] prior to software installation for the requisite number of computers on which the software program has been loaded/installed for concurrent use at its premises After the customer agrees to the terms of the CLOSA, authorised representatives of the Plaintiffs send the license key to the customer's registered e-mail address, following which the installation of the software is possible.
28.6. The Plaintiffs maintain an extensive and frequently updated database of all their licensees who have acquired valid licenses for the Plaintiffs' CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 5 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 Software. Therefore, any person/entity using Plaintiffs' Software in a manner that goes beyond the CLOSA is in breach of contractual rights with the Plaintiffs, and will also have violated the intellectual property rights subsisting within the Plaintiffs' Software programs. 28.7. The Plaintiffs keep a check on the security of their software by a technology called 'phone home' technology built into the Plaintiffs' software, which verifies whether the Plaintiffs' software is being used in accordance with the terms of the CLOSA or not.
Overview of the Defendants:
28.8. Defendant No. 1/Mr. Neeraj Sharma a director of Defendant no.2, has been directly responsible for making several decisions on behalf of the Defendant No. 2 during the course of his duties, and he had knowledge of Defendant No. 2's unauthorised use of Plaintiffs' software. 28.9. Defendant no. 2/Anzo Controls Private Limited, claims to be a manufacturing-driven company that designs and engineers integrated automation ecosystems in their own facility.
28.10. It is stated that on 10.05.2023, Defendant No. 2 purchased 3 (three) licenses for Plaintiff No.1's software program titled SolidWorks (desktop) Premium Package, along with support and maintenance services applicable until 31.05.2026.
28.11. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that in September 2024 the Plaintiffs, learnt that the Defendants had been using pirated/unauthorised versions of Plaintiffs' software SolidWorks at their offices. 28.12. From September 2024 to May 2025, the Plaintiffs made several attempts to amicably resolve the dispute arising from the Defendants' unauthorised and pirated use of the Plaintiffs' software programs, including CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 6 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 SolidWorks, through emails and telephone communications. Despite these efforts, the Defendants did not respond.
Plaintiffs also issued a legal notice to the Defendants on 27.05.2025, followed by a Litigation Hold Notice on 24.06.2025 under Order 18(ii) of the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2021, indicating the Plaintiffs' intent to initiate legal proceedings. On 02.07.2025, the Plaintiffs once again approached the Defendants to explore an amicable settlement; however, no response was received. 28.13. The Plaintiffs, on 21.10.2025, conducted an investigation and discovered that pirated and unauthorized versions of their software programs were used on at least fifteen (15) computer systems by the Defendants on 4,132 occasions prior to 21.10.2025 as mentioned at paragraph 43 of the plaint. The summary details of infringement mentioned in paragraph '43' of the plaint are reproduced below:
CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 7 of 15This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 8 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 9 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 28.14. On 21.10.2025, the Plaintiffs' investigator conducted a telephonic investigation with two employees of Defendant No. 2 namely Mr Vikram Kaushik and Mr. Rohit Kumar, who confirmed that members of Defendant No. 2's design team use SolidWorks software in the organisation from their Gurugram Office.
29. Learned counsel for the Plaintiffs states that Plaintiffs will not interfere with the uninterrupted use of the three licenses legally obtained by the Defendant No. 2.
30. The Court has heard the learned counsel of the Plaintiffs and has perused the case.
31. The material on record, including the particulars of the Plaintiffs' Software infringement mentioned at paragraph no. 43 of the plaint, prima facie establishes that the Defendants have consistently and knowingly used unauthorised/pirated versions of the Plaintiffs' Software. The infringement report, which enumerates these instances, reflects a significant number of violations spanning over the years. This continuous and unauthorised use by the Defendants is neither isolated nor accidental but clearly demonstrates a mala fide intent.CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 10 of 15
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51
32. In the facts noted above, the Plaintiffs have a prima facie case and the balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiffs as the Defendants are using the Plaintiffs' Software in an unauthorised manner and such illegal use is causing irreparable harm and injury to the Plaintiffs, which cannot be measured or compensated in monetary terms. Irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiffs if the Defendants are allowed to continue to use the pirated/unauthorised versions of the Plaintiffs ' Software.
33. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, Defendants, their principal officers, directors, agents, franchisees, servants and all others acting for and on their behalf at the Defendants, are restrained from:
a. directly or indirectly using, access, install any pirated unlicensed/unauthorised software programs of the Plaintiffs or reproduce and distribute any pirated/unlicensed/unauthorised software of the Plaintiffs in contravention of the terms of the CLOSA; b. from directly or indirectly formatting the computer systems and/or erasing any data, log files, installations, etc. pertaining to the copyrights of the Plaintiffs subsisting in their software programs and software-related documentation. The reference to software programs includes SolidWorks program and their various versions or any other software programs developed by the Plaintiffs.
34. In view of the fact that the Plaintiffs have sought appointment of a Local Commissioner, the very purpose of the grant of ex parte ad interim injunction would be defeated if the Defendant is given notice contemplated in Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC prior to the execution of the commission. Hence, it is directed that the Plaintiffs shall serve notice under Order CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 11 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC at the time of execution of the Local Commission, which shall not be later than two (2) weeks from today. An affidavit of compliance must be filed within two (2) weeks.
35. List before the learned Joint Registrar (J) for completion of service and pleadings, marking of exhibits and admission/denial of documents on 16.12.2025.
36. List before the Court on 10.04.2026.
I.A. 27280/2025 (for appointment of Local Commissioner)
37. This is an application filed under Order XXVI Rules 4, 9 and 10 and Order XXXIX Rule 7 read with Section 151 of CPC for appointment of Local Commissioner.
38. In order to ensure that the injunction is fully complied with and to preserve the evidence of infringement, this Court deems it appropriate to appoint one (1) Local Commissioner; the appointment is confined thereto:
S.No. ADDRESS PARTICULARS
1. Unit No.- 1004 A-C, 10th Floor JMD Ms. Abhilasha Nautiyal,
Megapolis, Sector - 48 Advocate
Gurugram, Haryana - 122008
E. No. D/3749/2010
M. No. 9818570649
39. The mandate of the Local Commissioner is as under:
i. The Local Commissioner, along with a representative of the Plaintiffs (along with two (2) technical experts) and their counsel, shall be permitted to enter upon the premises of the Defendants mentioned hereinabove, or any other location/premises that may be identified, CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 12 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 during the course of the commission, in order to conduct the search and seizure.
ii. The Local Commissioner shall inspect the Hard Disks of the computers, compact discs and/or other storage/replicating media, with the help of Technical Experts of the Plaintiffs and determine if the aforesaid storage/ replicating media contain pirated/counterfeit/ unlicensed versions of the Plaintiffs' software programs. iii. The evidence of any of the Plaintiffs' programs, which may be available on the Defendants' system, shall be copied on a hard drive and the computers shall be released back to the Defendants, provided they give an undertaking to pay the license fee to the Plaintiffs as may be determined by this Court, upon entering appearance in the matter. The Local Commissioner shall get the said undertaking executed by the Defendants.
iv. The Local Commissioner, with the help of Technical Experts of the Plaintiffs, shall prepare audit reports/license summaries/inventories of the aforesaid storage/replicating media.
v. If the computers and/or other storage/replicating media of the Defendants are password protected, the Defendants shall make accessible the said password(s) so as to enable the Local Commissioner to execute the commission.
vi. In case, the Defendants are unwilling to furnish an undertaking to the Local Commissioner stipulated at (iii) above, the Local Commissioner shall seize ·and seal the computer CPUs, compact discs, and/or other storage/replicating media as found to contain unlicensed/pirated/counterfeit versions of any of the Plaintiffs CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 13 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51 software programs and return the said seized and sealed items on superdari to the Defendants with a direction to produce the same before this Court, without tampering with them in any manner, as and when directed by this Court.
vii. The Local Commissioner is permitted to take photographs and video-
graph of the proceedings of the commission, if it is deemed appropriate.
viii. Both parties shall provide assistance to the Local Commissioner for carrying out the aforesaid directions.
ix. In case the premises are found locked, the Local Commissioner shall be permitted to break open the lock(s). To ensure an unhindered and effective execution of this order, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the jurisdictional Police Station is directed to render all assistance and protection to the Local Commissioner as and when sought. x. After the execution of the commission, the Defendants are free to approach the Court within a period of two (2) weeks, if they intend to obtain the license of the Plaintiffs' software.
40. The order passed today shall not be uploaded for a period of two (2) weeks to enable the execution of the commissions.
41. The Local Commission shall be executed within two (2) weeks. The report of the Local Commissioner shall be filed within two (2) weeks thereafter.
42. The fee of the Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs. 2,50,000/- excluding out-of-pocket expenses, travel expenses, accommodation, etc., which is to be borne by the Plaintiffs.
43. In terms of the foregoing, the present application stands disposed of.
CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 14 of 15This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51
44. Either the learned counsel for the Plaintiff or the learned Local Commissioner is directed to collect a certified copy of this order from the Registry (Dispatch Branch) before for execution of the Commission.
45. The learned Local Commissioner shall carry the certified copy of this Order for execution of the Commission and a copy of the same shall be served upon the Defendant by the learned Local Commissioner at the time of the execution of the Commission.
46. Copy of this order to be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 4, 2025/rhc/AJ CS(COMM) 1175/2025 Page 15 of 15 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/11/2025 at 21:29:51