Macmillan And Anr. vs Suresh Chunder Deb on 8 August, 1890
Mr. Darby's notes form an independent work, and simply because they include the best part of Mr. Parr's notes which are very short and elementarily. I do not think that any unfair use of Mr. Pair's notes can be said to have been made by Mr. Darby. It is not without significance that the notes as such were not relied upon in the plaint as constituting an infringement; and though they were relied upon in the argument before us as is the Trial Court, the learned Counsel for the plaintiffs respondents principally relied upon the publication of the text as constituting be infringement of the copyright. After a careful consideration of the judgment of the Trial Court as also of the arguments and the notes in question, I take the same view of the inclusion of Mr. Parr's notes in the defendants' publication as Wilson, J., took in Macmillan v. Suresh Chunder Deb 17 C.951 at pp. 960, 960, 8 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 1180 of Mr. Palgrave's notes in relation to the publication by the defendant in that case.