Delhi High Court - Orders
Epikindifi Software And Solutions ... vs Edison Ramesh & Ors on 6 October, 2025
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 783/2023, I.A. 21508/2023, I.A. 22508/2023, I.A.
25041/2023, I.A. 25501/2023, I.A. 3171/2024, I.A. 3229/2024 I.A.
40287/2024, I.A. 41463/2024, I.A. 46280/2024, I.A. 47070/2024 I.A.
48173/2024, I.A. 49043/2024 & I.A. 6369-6371/2025
EPIKINDIFI SOFTWARE AND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Gautam Swarup, Mr. Ankur Das,
Mr. Kartikeya Jaiswal & Ms. Sakshi
Pandey, Advocates
versus
EDISON RAMESH & ORS. .....Defendants
Through: Mr. Aditya Rawat, Mr. B.
Karunakaran, Advocates for D-7.
Ms. Sneha Jain, Ms. Surabhi Pande,
Mr Angad S Makkar, Adv, for D-9.
Mr. Maanav Kumar, Ms. Shivanjali
Bhalerao, Advocate for D-11.
Mr. Akshay Sapre, Advocate for D-12
(through VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
ORDER
% 06.10.2025 I.A. 25501/2023 (seeking deletion from the array of parties)
1. This is an application filed by defendant no. 9 under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'), seeking deletion from the array of parties.
CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 1 of 8This 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00
2. The subject matter of the suit is the administrative control of five (5) Amazon Web Services root accounts ['AWS root accounts'], the details of which are set out in the plaint at paragraph '29'. The suit has been filed for seeking access to these accounts. It is the case of the plaintiff that these accounts were created by the plaintiff on behalf of its clients and service charges for these accounts were paid by the plaintiff, which were reimbursed by the clients. The plaintiff's access to these AWS root accounts has been disabled and the suit has been filed for regaining the access to these accounts.
3. The plaintiff has impleaded defendant no. 9, i.e., Amazon Web Services Pvt. Ltd., on the assumption that it is defendant no. 9 who is the service provider for the five (5) AWS root accounts [refer paragraph 21 of the plaint] and for seeking reliefs against defendant no. 9 for restoring access to these AWS root accounts.
4. Learned Counsel for defendant no. 9, submits that defendant no.9 has no privity of contract with the plaintiff with respect to the subject AWS root accounts and states that it is indeed Amazon Web Services PTY Limited, Australia ['AWS, Australia'], i.e., defendant no. 11, which is the service provider for the subject AWS root accounts and the relevant contracting entity.
4.1. She clarifies that the admitted documents, which have now come on record, show that initially, for three of these AWS root accounts, the contracting entity was Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA), however, at the time of filing of this suit, the contracting entity for all five (5) AWS root accounts was defendant no. 11, to the knowledge of the plaintiff. She relies upon the table reproduced in I.A. 3229/2024, which reads as under: -
CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 2 of 8This 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 S. No. AWS A/c No. Contracting AWS AWS Party (Billed entity at entity to) creation now
1. 176357513865 Epikindifi AWS AWS Australia Australia Pty Ltd. Pty Ltd.
ATTN:
Shubho Banerjee Level 27, 101 Collin street Melbourne, Sydney, 3000, AU
2. 795679207136 Zeal solutions Amazon AWS ATTN: CCR Web Australia TMB Services, Pty Ltd.
Level 27, 101 Inc
Collin street,
Melbourne,
sydeny, 3000,
AU
3. 677945730785 Zeal Amazon AWS
Solutions Pvt Web Australia
Ltd Services, Pty Ltd.
ATTN: Inc
Subhamoy
Banerjee
101 Collins
Street,
Melbourne ,
sydeny , 3000
, AU
4. 718748130261 Epikindifi AWS AWS
ATTN: tet Australia Australia
df Pty Ltd. Pty Ltd.
ffd, 55, 66,
AU
5. 583868565775 ATTN: Amazon AWS
Tushar Saini Web Australia
Unit 11 Services, Pty Ltd.
175 Pitt Inc
Street
Sydney ,
CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 3 of 8
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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 NSW, 2160, AU 4.2. She submits that all the invoices placed on record by defendant no. 11 show that all payments/service charges towards these AWS root accounts were either received by Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA) or by defendant no. 11 (AWS, Australia), and there was no payment received by defendant no. 9 either from the plaintiff or its clients, for these accounts. 4.3. She states that defendant no. 9 has no control over these AWS root accounts and it is defendant no. 11 (AWS, Australia) which would be the proper and necessary party.
4.4. She submits that the plaintiff approached this Court on the basis of an e-mails dated 09.10.2023 and 12.10.2023; however, the said e-mails also did not originate from defendant no. 9 and originated from Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA).
4.5. She submits that, in respect of these five (5) AWS root accounts, the billing addresses of the customers, as provided by the plaintiff at the time of opening of the account, were located in Australia, and the AWS contracting party in such cases was therefore never defendant no. 9. She refers to the terms and conditions of the customer agreement placed on record by plaintiff at document no. 5, with the paper-book; more specifically the definition of 'Account Country' and 'AWS Contracting Party' appearing at pages 44 and 45.
4.6. She states that since defendant no. 11 has already been impleaded as a party vide order dated 14.12.2023, defendant no. 9 should be deleted from the array of parties.
5. In reply, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 4 of 8 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 does not dispute that the invoices relating to the AWS root accounts, as placed on record, reflect defendant no. 11 as the AWS contracting party in the most recent invoices issued for these accounts, especially at the time when the dispute arose, i.e., in September-October 2023. 5.1. He also fairly concedes that the e-mails dated 09.10.2023 and 12.10.2023 does not refer to defendant no. 9 and refers to Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA).
5.2. He states that, since the names of the persons issuing the e-mails were Indian, the plaintiff presumed that the e-mails had originated from employees of defendant no. 9. However, he fairly clarifies that there is no document available with the plaintiff to substantiate its assumption that these senders are indeed the employees of defendant no. 9. He fairly concedes that the e-mail itself states that e-mails have originated from Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA).
6. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.
7. Having perused the definitions set out in the Customer Agreement placed on record by the plaintiff itself and more specifically the definition of 'Account Country' and 'AWS Contracting Party' as well as invoices placed on record by defendant no. 11, this Court is of the considered opinion that the said documents clearly show that in respect to the five (5) subject AWS root accounts, the plaintiff's privity of contract, if any, is with defendant no.11.
8. The invoices placed on record by defendant no. 11 duly reflect its name and particulars and plaintiff admits making payments to defendant no. 11 in terms of the said invoices. The plaintiff also admits that the relevant CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 5 of 8 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 period when disputes arose in this suit, the 'AWS Contracting Party' for all the five AWS root accounts was defendant no. 11. In these facts, this Court is satisfied that the service provider for these accounts was never defendant no. 9 and as per the admitted documents, is defendant no. 11.
9. So also, the e-mails dated 09.10.2023 and 12.10.2023, placed on record, clearly reflect that the same have been issued under the aegis of Amazon Web Services Inc. (USA) and does not refer to defendant no. 9.
10. In these circumstances, the documents relied upon by the plaintiff itself fail to show any privity of contract with defendant no. 9. To the contrary the documents of defendant no. 11 admitted by the plaintiff, evidence that the service provider of the AWS root accounts is defendant no.
11. Defendant no. 11 who is represented in Court also admits that it is the relevant service provider for the subject AWS root accounts.
11. This Court is therefore satisfied that defendant no. 9 is neither a necessary nor a proper party.
12. Accordingly, defendant no. 9 is deleted from the array of parties. The plaintiff shall file an amended memo of parties within two (2) weeks.
13. It is, however, clarified that the issue of contempt, if any, committed by defendant no. 9 shall continue to remain sub-judice in I.A. 25041/2023 and the deletion of defendant no. 9 will not have any bearing on the said application.
14. With these observations, the application stands disposed of. I.A. 6369/2025 (seeking condonation of delay of 14 days in filing the replication to the written statement of defendant no. 10) I.A. 6370/2025 (seeking condonation of delay of 14 days in filing the replication to the written statement of defendant no. 4) I.A. 6371/2025 (seeking condonation of delay of 14 days in filing the CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 6 of 8 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 replication to the written statement of defendant no. 12)
15. These are the applications filed by the plaintiff seeking condonation of delay in bringing on record its replication to the written statement filed by defendant nos. 10, 04 and 12 respectively.
16. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the replication is condoned.
17. The applications are allowed, and the replications are taken on record. I.A. 47069/2024 (seeking amendment of the plaint)
18. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking amendment of the plaint to incorporate appropriate pleadings and reliefs qua defendant nos. 9, 10, 11, and 12.
19. Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that defendant nos. 10, 11, and 12 were impleaded after the suit had been instituted, vide orders dated 20.11.2023, 14.12.2023, and 27.11.2024, respectively. He states that this application has been filed for making necessary consequential amendments in the plaint and for seeking appropriate relief against the said defendants.
20. Learned counsel for defendant no. 10 states that the application may be allowed without prejudice to its rights and contentions, with liberty to raise all their pleas in the amended plaint.
21. Learned counsel for defendant no. 11 states that defendant no. 11 objects to the proposed amendment both on merits and on the ground of mala fides.
22. Learned counsel for defendant no. 12 states that in case the application is allowed, liberty be granted to the said defendant to file CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 7 of 8 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00 amended written statement. He states that this application may be decided by the Court on its own merits.
23. It is noted that the proposed amendments in the plaint also seek relief against defendant no. 9. However, in view of the order passed above in I.A. 25501/2023 deleting defendant no. 9 from the array of parties, learned counsel for the plaintiff seeks liberty to withdraw this application and to file a fresh amendment application incorporating pleadings and reliefs only qua defendant nos. 10, 11, and 12.
24. In view of the above, the application is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty reserved to the plaintiff as prayed for.
25. The appropriate application is directed to be filed within two (2) weeks.
CS(COMM) 783/2023
26. Parties are directed to complete their respective pleadings in all pending applications, within four (4) weeks.
27. List on 22.01.2026.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J OCTOBER 6, 2025/mt/aa/AM CS(COMM) 783/2023 Page 8 of 8 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 17/10/2025 at 22:12:00