BRY AIR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. WESTERN ENGINEERING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By thisorder,lproposetodisposeofl.A.No. 14133/1992 wherein the plaintiffs have sought for an interim temporary injunction seeking for restraining the defendants, their servants and agents from divulging or making known directly or indirectly the know-how design and technology of dehumidifier of the plaintiffs to any third party or person or make use of the same either alone or jointly and also the application, I.A.No. 4566/1996, filed by the defendant.

(2.) . This Court by order dated 14.8.1992 while issuing summons and notices issued an ex parte ad interim temporary injunction restraining the defendant from copying the drawings of the plaintiffs with respect to dehumidifiers. The defendant appeared in the suit and contested the matter and also filed an application for vacation of the interim injunction granted by this Court. The aforesaid application filed by the defendant underOrder39,Rule 4, Civil Procedure Code was registered as I.A. No. 14133/ 1992. The said application as also the application filed by the plaintiff underorder 39, Rules 1 & 2, Civil Procedure Code being LA. No. 4566/1996 are being disposed of by me by this common order.

(3.) . The plaintiffs instituted the present suit in this Court contending, inter alia, that the Bry Air Inc., USA is the proprietor of the copyright in several engineering drawings relating to dehumidifiers. It is stated that plaintiff No. 2 started his business in India in 1977 representing the said Company of the USA and started manufacturing of the said dehumidifiers in India with technical know-how of Bry Air Inc. USA. It is stated that plaintiff No. 1 is now the proprietor of copyright of the drawings of the said dehumidifiers which are original artistic works within the meaning of the Copyright Act. It is alleged that defendant has infringed the aforesaid copyright by three-deminsionally reproducing the drawings through the manufacture of the dehumidifier. Accordingly, the present suit was instituted along with which an application under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 was filed on which the aforesaid ex parte ad interim injunction was granted.