M.L.Jain, J. - (1.) The respondent Shri R.K.. Jain filed a complaint against (1) Shri F.L. Berawalla and (2) his daughter Smt. J.T. Saboo-wala, (3) Shri M.M. Bhatt, (4) Bombay Law House and (5) the Metropolitan Book Co., Pvt., Ltd., under Section 190 Criminal Procedure Code . read with Sections 51 and 63 of the Copy Right Act, 1957 (herein the Act). The complainant stated that he is the author of the Central Excise Law Guide (1st to 4th Editions). The first edition was published in 1977, the second in 1979 and e third in 1980 and the fourth in 1982. He also publishes a monthly journal. Excise Law Times. He is the original author of these publications and has become the first owner of the copyright therein. The copyright has been acquired on the basis of intellectual labour and hard work for nearly ten years, of gooddeal of collection of relevant material and information and, of its editing and expenditure in the preparation of its work and its publication and writing of detailed comments, and of giving expert views on various legal aspects.
(2.) Accused No. I Berawalla is the author of the offending publication Central Excises (Law & Practice) 2nd edition, 1982. Accused No. 2 is the co-author. Accused No. 3 is the publisher of the book. Accused No. 4 is the firm of publisher and Accused No. 5 is the seller of the said book. It was alleged that the accused person have infringed the copy right of the complainant by substantially, lavishly and vulgarly copying from his works, by printing and publishing and selling such infringing work. A copy of each of the 3rd edition of the Central Excise Law Guide, fourth edition of the same book, 5th edition and 9th edition of the Central Excises Tariff of India and a copy of the Excise Law Times for the month of July, 1978 were placed on record. He also produced the infringing copy. He also detailed the matter copied from his book by the accused and stated that his copy right has been infringed in the following manner :- (a) Large number of the paragraphs have been copied out vertatim by the accused; (b) Most of the mistakes committed in the original work have been . repeated in the infringing work; (c) Headings have been copied in the infringing work from the original work of the complainant; 8 (d) If some omission have taken place in the original works of the complainant the same have also taken place in the infringing work; (e) The complainant has condensed judgments and departmental clearifications in his own style with great labour and expenses but the accused have copied the same without any recourse to the source. (f) The book contains personal views of the complainant. The same comments have been repeated vertatim by the accused persons in their infringing work. (g) The expert opinions given on the problems of readers of the Excise Law Times have also been copied by the accused persons and thus the matter which is out of context has also found place in the infringing work because of the copying from the original work of the complainant.
(3.) Besides, inviting the court to punish the accused under the Act, the complainant also prayed for directing the general search and seizure of the infringing copies, the manuscript of the infringing work, bill book, receipt books, cash memo and delivery challans from 1-8-1982, all copies of the original works of the complainant, proof and print order of infringing publication and all other related material.;