Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sterlite Technologies Limited vs Hfcl Limited on 1 August, 2022

Author: Prathiba M. Singh

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                          $~30
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +                         CS(COMM) 19/2022
                                 STERLITE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED                             ..... Plaintiff
                                                    Through:       Mr. Chander Lall, Sr. Advocate with
                                                                   & Mr. Ankit Arvind, Advocates.
                                                                   (M:9873603089)
                                                    versus
                                 HFCL LIMITED                                         ..... Defendant
                                                    Through:       Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Advocate, Ms.
                                                                   Apoorva Murali, Ms. Aashish Gupta,
                                                                   Ms. Shantanu Tyagi, Mr. Saksham
                                                                   Dhingra, Mr. Krishna Tangirala, mr.
                                                                   Luma Abbas and Mr. Ayush Shahay
                                                                   Advocates. (M:9910720088)

                                 CORAM:
                                 JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                                    ORDER

% 01.08.2022 I.A. 1375/2022 (for exemption from filing notarized affidavits)

1. This is an application filed by the Plaintiff for exemption from filing notarized affidavits. The notarized affidavits are stated to have been filed. However the same are not on record. Let the same be filed or brought on record within two weeks. Registry to put up a report on the next date confirming the filing of the notarised affidavits. I.A. 1375/2022 is disposed of.

I.A. 1374/2022 (for Local Commissioner)

2. This is an application seeking appointment of a Local Commissioner. The same is not pressed at this stage.

3. I.A. 1374/2022 is disposed of as not pressed.

I.A. 6223/2022(for directions)

4. This is an application filed by the Defendant seeking permission to export further quantities of optic fibre cables, in terms of the purchase orders as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the application. Vide previous order dated 25th April, 2022, the Defendant was allowed to honour the specified purchase orders.

5. Today, the supplies in respect of the purchase orders covered by this application are stated to have been made and the affidavit in respect thereof giving the exact monetary details of such orders, is stated to have been filed.

6. Let the same be checked by the Registry and subject to the said affidavit having been filed, no further orders are called for in this application.

7. Accordingly, I.A. 6223/2022 is disposed of.

I.A. 10557/2022 (for direction)

8. This is an application filed by the Defendant, seeking permission to fulfil certain pending purchase orders for optic fibre cables, as set out in the application. The total value of the orders is stated to be a sum of Rs. 63,56,12,691.20/- out of which the impugned products constitute Rs. 39,68,35,327.20/-.

9. This application is opposed by ld. Sr. Counsel for the Plaintiff on the ground that these purchase orders have been placed, after the order granting the interim injunction was passed on 12th January, 2022. He submits that this would establish that the Defendant has been violating the orders of this Court.

10. Considering the fact that in I.A. 6223/2022, similar purchase orders of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI CS(COMM) 19/2022 Page 2 of 5 Signing Date:03.08.2022 17:12:32 the Defendant were permitted to be serviced and also the fact that a substantial portion of the purchase orders do not relate to the impugned products, this Court is of the opinion that the same can be allowed for the reasons recorded earlier, on similar terms as fixed by the order dated 25th April, 2022, which has not been challenged by either of the parties. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:

"7. The Court has perused the application which reveals that out of the total purchase orders which has been placed by the Defendant's customers on the Defendant, some portion of the purchase order relates to the impugned products i.e., cables in the present case. The total sale value of these purchase orders is to the tune of Rs.44,31,70,111/- out of which the impugned products constitute a sum of Rs. 16,79,52,486/-. Since these are composite orders and not honouring the same could cause business loss and loss of customers to the Defendant, and the matter is still part-heard, now listed on 8th July, 2022 for further hearing, it is deemed appropriate to allow the supplies subject to conditions. It is accordingly directed that the Defendant shall deposit a sum of INR 2 crores with the Registrar General of this Court, within four weeks from today, subject to which purchase orders 1 to 15 at paragraph 4 of the application, are permitted to be honoured and the supplies shall be made in respect thereof. In this regard, paragraph 8(i) of the order dated 14th March, 2022 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present application.

8. The said amount of INR 2 crores be retained in an FDR in auto renewal mode."

11. Accordingly, subject to deposit of Rs.3 crores by the Defendant within four weeks, the purchase orders mentioned in I.A. 10557/2022 are Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI CS(COMM) 19/2022 Page 3 of 5 Signing Date:03.08.2022 17:12:32 permitted to be honoured and supplies may be made by the Defendant in this regard. A proper affidavit giving details of the actual sales values shall be placed on record within a period of eight weeks.

12. I.A. 10557/2022 is disposed of in these terms. CS(COMM) 19/2022 & CC(COMM) 11/2022, I.A. 504/2022, I.A. 1334/2022

13. Vide previous order dated 29th July, 2022, in view of the detailed hearings in this matter, the Court had suggested that both parties seek instructions on the conduct of an expedited trial in this matter to finally decide the suit, instead of deciding on interlocutory applications. The relevant extract of the said order dated 29th July 2022 reads:

"2. In view of the detailed submissions made by the parties and a perusal of the record and the prior arts cited, this Court is of the opinion that primarily only one issue arises in this matter, where some technical opinion would be required. Accordingly, the Court has suggested to both the parties that they can lead evidence of one technical witness each, who can file affidavits only dealing with the prior arts cited and the three patent specifications of the Plaintiff, including that in the suit patent, i.e., Application Nos.201621010853 and 2209/MUM/2015, and Patent No. IN335369. The cross-examination of these two witnesses can then be fixed for two dates before the Court and the matter can proceed for final arguments. The submissions already made could be treated as opening submissions by parties. This would ensure that the suit is decided finally rather than deciding only the interlocutory applications."

14. Today, it is submitted by ld. Sr. Counsel for the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would like a decision on the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC and it is not willing to proceed to trial at this stage as per the previous order.

15. Ld. Sr. Counsel for the Defendant has also informed the Court that one of the Plaintiff's patent applications for an optical fibre cable dated 9th June, 2015, relied upon by the Defendant in its submissions, has been withdrawn by the Plaintiff during the course of the present hearings, on 21st July, 2022.

16. There are also certain documents handed over in Court by the Defendant in a sealed cover, during the course of hearing. It is made clear that the same shall be retained by the Registry in a sealed cover. No copies shall be issued to any counsels or parties, except with specific directions of the Court. The Court Master to hand over the sealed cover to the concerned Deputy Registrar who shall maintain the same in sealed cover as confidential documents.

17. In so far as the interim injunction application is concerned, arguments have been heard in the application, I.A. 504/2022. Judgement reserved.

18. Both parties to file their written submissions, if any, by 3rd August, 2022

19. It is also made clear that any supplies made and deposits made pursuant to I.A. 6223/2022 and I.A. 10557/2022 are subject to final orders being passed in this application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J AUGUST 1, 2022/dj/ms Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI CS(COMM) 19/2022 Page 5 of 5 Signing Date:03.08.2022 17:12:32