Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathanl Senior Advocate, Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Senior Advocate with. Ms. versus. LOGY & ORS Through: STICE G.P.

Similar documents
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI M/S. KALPAMRIT AYURVED PVT. Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN O R D E R %

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 23 rd April, 2018 J U D G M E N T

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI BENNETT, COLEMAN & COMPANY. MR. AJAY KUMAR & ORS... Defendants Through None

versus CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI UTV SOFTWARE COMMUNICATIONS. versus. Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. THEPIRATEBAY.ORG AND ORS... Defendants Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. CS (OS) No.284/2012. Date of order:

#25 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 30 th May, 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN J U D G M E N T

J2s\~",~ov<j", Through. versus. & ORS. ... Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR ORDER %

versus CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O R D E R IA No of 2011 (by Defendant u/o VII R. 10 & 11 CPC)

#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. MR RAJBIR ORS... Defendant Through: Ex Parte

18 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM)695/2017 & I.A.No.11854/2017. versus. % Date of Decision: 10 th May, 2018 J U D G M E N T

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Order delivered on: 2 nd September, I.A. No.17351/2015 in CS (OS) 2501/2015.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Order delivered on: 20 th August, CS (OS) No.1668/2013. versus

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: versus M/S R.S. SALES CORPORATION & ANR

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) 1468/2016 & I.A.No.1532/2017. versus. % Date of Decision: 02 nd November, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CS (OS) No of Versus CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O R D E R

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment pronounced on: 4 th January, versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 20 th May, Versus

$~OS-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: CS(COMM) 69/2017. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

F-19 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Ishanki Gupta, Advocate. versus.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(OS) No. 684/2004 % 8 th December, versus

$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 06 th November, 2017 J U D G M E N T

.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO(OS) No.534/2010 & CM Nos /2010. versus. % Date of Hearing : August 25, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Decision : December 3, 2012 CS(OS) 1785/2010

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 638/2014. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IA No.13139/2011 in CS(OS) 1163/2011 Date of Decision : July 05, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Reserve: Date of Order: March 20, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO (OS) 367/2007. Date of Decision : 08 TH FEBRUARY, 2008

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment reserved on: 24 th April, 2015 Judgment delivered on: 08 th October, 2015

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) No.1564/2016. % 24 th November, 2017

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Through Mr. Atul Nigam, Mr. Amit Tiwari, Advs. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI. Vs. Respondent: Sandeep Gullah

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Pronounced on: 16th October, 2014 CS (OS) NO. 1804/2012

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 13 th August, 2018 J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : OCTOBER 12, versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P GARG, J.

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 221/2017 & I.A.A 12707/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.

$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 35/2017. Through Mr. Raunaq Kamath, Advocate. versus

26 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. Through: None. % Date of Decision: 22 nd August, 2017 J U D G M E N T

$~OS-5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. Through: None. % Date of Decision: 12 th December, 2017 J U D G M E N T

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 64/2018 & I.A. 927/2015. Versus GRASIM ELECTRICALS AND. Through Ex parte

KING POINT ENTERPRISES CO LTD Through: Mr. Surinder Singh, Advocate.

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus

* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. + I.A. Nos /2007 & 5651/2009 in CS(OS) No. 829/2002

: 1 : Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100. Total number of questions : 6 Total number of printed pages : 7

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus P.V. KANAKARAJ TRADING AS. Through None. % Date of Decision : 05 th December, 2017

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment pronounced on: 29 th October, 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. FAO (OS) No.178/2008. Judgment Reserved on : 30th September, 2008

Nirmaljit Singh Narula vs Indijobs At Hubpages.Com & Ors on 30 March, 2012

$~O-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: CS(COMM) 99/2016. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR. Through: Ms. Safia Said, Advocate. versus. Through:

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) 458/2015. versus. Through: None.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO No. 347/2017. % 23 rd August, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: TRADE MARKS ACT, Judgment delivered on :3rd September, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2248/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERPETUAL, MANDATORY INJUNCTION. Date of Judgment: CM(M) No.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

Through Mr.Prabhjit Jauhar Adv. with Ms.Anupama Kaul, Adv.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. MANAS CHANDRA & ANR... Defendants Through: None

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Decided on: versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT

$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: RSA No.46/2011

$~4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:- 11 th April, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION Date of decision: 5th April, CS(OS) 586/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI. Vs. Respondent: Sunrise Beverages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2318/2006

CS(COMM) 49/2017 Page 1 of 7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRADE MARK MATTER

TENDER FORM Controller of Stores, HIMACHAL PRADESH (INSTRUCTION TO TENDERERS)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER :

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) Nos.53/2015 & 54/ CS(COMM) No. 53/2015 and I.A. No.25929/2015 (stay)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 VERSUS

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + I.A. No.23086/2012 in CS(OS) No.3534/2012 ABBOTT HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD. versus

* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + IA No.10977/2007 & CS (OS) No.1418/2007. Date of decision : 18 th August, 2009

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS) RULES, 1981

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 728/2018. versus CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Through :Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Darpan Wadhwa, Ms. Abhiruchi Arora, Mr. Akhil Sachar and Ms. Jaishree Shukla, Advs.

KPP Suit (L) No. 967 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: FAO (OS) 298/2010

- versus - MAHAMEDHA URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY Date of decision: 17th July, 2013 RFA 383/2012. Versus

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Decided on: versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION. Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Pronounced on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + IA 16973/2013 in CC 50/2013 in CS(OS) 626/2012. versus

Date of Filing:21/01/2009 Date of Order :.07/05/2009 BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CS(OS) No.2397/2006 and IA No.7807/07 (S.151 CPC by Def.1and2 ) Date of decision:

I.A. No /2012 (u/order XXXVII Rule 3 (5) CPC)

Transcription:

IN THE HIGH + cs(os) 377s/20r TELEFONAK Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathanl Senior Advocate, Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. ur, Adv., Mr. Ash Mr. Mr. Tajveer Singh Bhatfia, Adv. versus XIAOMI TECHN LOGY & ORS Through:... Defeirdants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. o/ /o STICE G.P. MITTAL ORDER 08.12.20t4 Learned senior co and the same shall be filod for the Plaintiff states that the court fde has been obtained the course ofthe dav. Plaintiff is permi Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions and subjeet to filing of fair typed copies of the documents wi in four weeks. of. Exemption allowpd subject to just exceptions and subject tb filing of original

documents within eight of. Plaintiff is permi to file the documents as stated in the application in a seale.d cover. 2, The Defendants shall be entitled to inspect the documents through their authorised representatives or through their counsel, subject to notice to the Plaintiff/PlaintifPs counsel to be given by the c(ncerned branch., This suit for registered patents, by the Plaintiff t injunction, restraining infringement of rights in eight rendition of accounts, delivery up, etc. has been filed the Defendants. 2. Leamed senior coun$el for the Plaintiff states that the Plaintiff is the registered owner of the eight patents, i.e. IN203034, IN203036, IN234157, IN203686, rn213723 (AMR pqtents), ft:t229632, IN240471 (3G patents) and Dt24r747 (Edge Patent). The suit relates to the three technologies in the field of telecommunication njrtaining to 2G and 3G devices. J. As per the avermenls made in the plaint, the Plaintiff had previously invited Defendant no.l to u$e Plaintif.Ps ownership of Standard Essential Patents qua GSTWGPRS/EDGE/VYCDMA technology. The Plaintiff speoifically requested Defendant no.l to ob but inspite of this, infringing devices in that in fact De in a licence qua the Plaintiffls Standard Essential Patents, of obtaining licence, Defendant no.l launched its a in July, 2014. It is urged by the leamed senior counsel no.i expanded its operations by setting up an Indian

Subsidiary ( damages, rendition entitled to an injuncti 4. It is urged by the exclusive that sells and mark including within the j Learned senior no.2) and thus, the Defendants have become liable to pay accounts, delivery up and other reliefs and the Plaintiff is to protect its rightrs. senior counsel that Defendant no.l has entered into an with Defendant no.3 which is an e-commerae comp rny Defendant no.l's infringing devises/handsets in India iction ofthis Court. for the Plaintiff has refened to the injunction order passed in IA No.16750/2013 in CS(OS) No.20l0l2013 and Division Bench judgment of this Court in Tele India, MIPR 2012 Telefonaldiebolgaet where the Plaintiff s 6. I am satisfied that interim injunction in the Plaintiff and in t LM Ericison Torshamnsgatan v. Union of 345 as well as order dated 29.01.2013 passed in v. Kingtech Electronics (India), CS(OS) No.68/2012 were protected. Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for grant of ad favour. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of absence of an injunction order, the Plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss and inj 1 Issue summons of SUit and notice of the application to the Defendants by ordinary process, regi AD cover, speed post as well as through approved couner servlce, on to be taken within one week, returnable before the Joint Registrar on 05.02.201 8. Accordingly, it is di that till the next date of hearing:- (i) The directly or indirectly or through their agents, distributors, etc. are offering res trai for from manufacturing, assembling, inlporting, selling, or advertising including through their and third party

(ii) (iii) (iv) websites, held devices. the aooli AMR, 3G Plaintiff in tn213723 ( IN241747 ( patents till The Central import of specified in agents/affili patents; The Customs imported by Plaintiff and o under the Rules,2007; The De person, on resolution of its (a) Quantum that are infringing in (b) Revenue (telephone instruments, mobile handsets, tablets, hand_ les etc.) including the models mentioned in para 13 of and any future or other devices or modqls that include the EDGE technology/devicevapparatus as patented by the patents i.e. IN203034, IN203036, IN234157, IN203696, patents), 111229632, IN240471 (3G patents) and Patent) so as to result in infringement of the said suit r orders: of Excise and Customs is directed not to allow the iles, handsets, devices, tablets, erc. including the models h 13 of the application by the Defendants or their that are infringing in nature of the plaintiffls registered ities are directed that as and when any consignment is Defendants, intimation thereof shall be given to the ections, if any, of the Plaintiff thereto shall be decided I Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement are directed to file an Affidavit of a Director or other f of the Defendants duly authorised by a specific of Directors, disclosing the following information:- devices (handsets, tablets, efc.) sold by it in India till date and 3G compliant thereby rendering them ture; and from the sale of mobile devices (handsets. tablets

etc.) till 9. 10. 11. Compliance of Order Written statement service. Replicati List before the Joint Rule 3 CPC shall be made within ten days. reply shall be filed by the Defendants within 30 days of the inder, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. istrar for completion of pleadings and admission/denial of t2. documents on 05.02. List before the Court 15. r completion of pleadings. 9 13. This is an appli under Order )O(VI Rule 9 CPC filed by the plaintiff for appointment of three at (i) Xiaomi T Business Bay, Commissioners to visit the premises of the Defendants logy India Private Limtied, 8th Floor, Tower-l, Umiya ralli-sarjapur, Outer Ring Road, Bangalore, Kamataka- 560103; (ii) Flipkart I Private Limited, Ozone Manay Tech park, 56llg & 55109, 7th Floor. vipalya, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560068, Karnataka, 14. India and (iii) F New Delhi-l10066 to of various infringing components from the devices (handsets, Defendants after inspect and sign the to take copies of the In the circumstances Advocate (mobile no. no.98i I 283 3 31) and (ii Internet Private Limited, I-2/16, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, and collect documents indicating import and sales devices (handsets, tablets etc.) and other infringing ' premises and to seal the infringing mobile, etc.) and release the same on superdari to the some samples to be filed in the Court; and further to t books/ledgers/case books etc. of the Defendants and to be filed in the coun. the case, I hereby appoint (i) Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, 11124478), (ii) Ms.Ruchika Mittal, Advocate (mobile Mr. Jatin Rajput, (Mobile No.8j8j9400j5) as the Local

Cornrnissioners the premises of Defendants as 15. The fee of the Commissioners is fixed at Rs.1,25,000/ Rs.1,25,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- air/road travel ively which shall be borne by the P at a reasonable hotel. apart from the 16. In case of any the Local Comrnissioners shall entitled to avail necessary the local poliqe. The local polise i directed to render all necessaly r\ t7. 18. 19. The Local The application Dasti. shall submit reports within four disposed of.