Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. It is stated in the plaint that the Plaintiffs, upon receiving information of the Defendants‟ infringing activities in April, 2003 on BSA/NASSCOM anti piracy hotline, immediately initiated an investigation to ascertain if the Defendants were infringing the copyrights/trademarks of the Plaintiffs by using pirated software programs of the Plaintiffs on the computer system used at their premises for their day to day business activities. And later on, after coming to know the activities of the defendants, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs as the defendants were infringing the legal rights of both the companies.

7. The suit along with the interim application were listed before this court for the first time on 2 nd December, 2003 when the summons were issued in the main suit and in I.A. No.11295/03, an ex parte ad interim order was passed restraining the defendants, their representatives, agents and all other persons acting for and on their behalf from using the pirated/unlicensed software of the plaintiffs. In I.A. No.11296/03, this court had appointed Mr. Amit Pal, advocate as a Local commissioner with a direction to visit the premises of the defendants or any other premises belonging to the defendants to find the infringing software of both the plaintiffs.

(b) That the plaintiffs caught the defendants violating their copyrights by indulging in blatant end user piracy of their software programs in the year 2003. The Hon‟ble Court has granted an ex parte ad interim injunction against the defendants on 2nd December, 2003, restraining them from infringing the copyrights of the plaintiffs by using pirated/unlicensed software of the Plaintiffs and infringing the plaintiffs‟ registered trademarks Adobe, Adobe Illustrator, Microsoft etc.

35. In the case of Intel Corp. Vs. Dena Karan Nair CS (OS) No.1333/2005 it was held by this Court on 24 th April, 2006 when the defendant failed to appear and relying upon Hero Hond‟s case (supra) and Time Inc.‟s case (supra) awarded damages of Rs.3 lacs as opposed to the amount of Rs.20 lacs which had been prayed for by the plaintiffs.

36. In the present case as already pointed out the local commissioner was also appointed to visit the premises of the defendants to locate the pirated/unlicensed software. The local commissioner as per the order of the court has visited the premises of the defendants and in his report, it has been found that the defendants had pirated software of plaintiff no. 2 at the premises of the defendants.