Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Plaintiff in 2020 was aware that Defendant no. 2 to 4 started their venture by the name of Prime Diamond Tech (Defendant No. 1 Firm) and started rendering similar services as that of Plaintiff. Defendants No. 2 to 4 also hired Defendant No. 5 in their partnership firm as Assistant Manager. Plaintiff, therefore, got that the Defendants had left their jobs and in connivance of each other have misappropriated the proprietary information, technical know-how, and copyright of the Plaintiff and therefore, has filed a Criminal Complaint against the Defendants (FIR No. 1121001520011) dated 21.12.2020 was accordingly registered before DCB Police Station, Surat City citing gross breach of IPC sections 406, 409, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 43B and 66 under the IT Act, 2000, and Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The authorized signatory NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/134/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2024 undefined along with Police Authorities visited the premises of Defendant No. 1 at the address to note that identical machines incorporating similar technology as that of Plaintiff's have been deployed at their premises. Defendant nos. 2 to 5 have breached their implied and/or express obligations to maintain the confidentiality of Plaintiff's confidential information about the HPHT apparatus. The Defendants appear to have made copies of the Plaintiff's confidential information including the latter's industrial drawings and software (source code). Later, Plaintiff was aware that Defendant No. 2 to 4 applied vide Diary No. 20669/CO-2020/L grossly misrepresenting that the 'work' filed as part of the instant impugned copyright application had been developed by them, when they were even aware of the criminal complaint that was filed by the Plaintiff was pending, went on to obtain copyright registrations vide RoC No. L-99664/2021, RoC No. L-99493/2021 and RoC No. L- 999700/2021. The Plaintiff then issued a legal notice dated 23.03.2021 against the Defendants granting them an opportunity to withdraw their NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/134/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2024 undefined registration and to further refrain from continuing with such infringing activities. However, the Defendants replied to the same on date 08.04.2021 citing haphazard reasons not in consonance with law to justify their illegal claims. Moreover, the Plaintiff has been in business with one Eli Dori Diamonds Ltd., an Israel based company, since the year 2016 to whom the Plaintiff supplies TC Matrix regularly. In the year 2021, Plaintiff was found out that Prime Diamond Tech was also involved in activities by way of infringing on the rights of the Plaintiff. On 13th April 2021, the Plaintiff through its Director communicated with Alexander Lavetman of Eli Dori Diamonds Ltd., about the transactions which took place between Prime Diamond Tech and Eli Dori Diamonds Ltd and were able to get hold of invoices for the exported materials from Prime Diamond Tech and photographs of the same which are exactly an imitation of the Plaintiff's work. Besides these, Plaintiff has also become aware that the Defendants are sending/exporting such components using Plaintiff's know-how to various parties and NEUTRAL CITATION C/AO/134/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2024 undefined earning illegitimately. Defendant has not taken any license or permission from Plaintiff and has made or otherwise procured substantial and material reproduction of Plaintiff's machines/devices. Further, Defendant No. 2 had earlier approached Defendant No. 6 (The Firm) making certain representations as to holding of technical information of Plaintiff and agreed to commission and commission the HPHT machines based on the said information of the Plaintiff which is a subject matter of the suit. Mr. Vipul Dhameliya (Ex-Director of defendant no.6 firm) mentioned in the affidavit that Defendant No. 2 has personally approached Mr. Nitinkumar Chandrakant Balar and made a deal to share the technical know-