Sonani Industries Pvt. Ltd. (the petitioner, formerly Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd.) has filed three rectification petitions seeking cancellation of copyright registrations held by Respondent No. 1 (Mr. Sanjay Jayantbhai Patel). Separately, the petitioner has filed a suit for copyright infringement against Respondent No. 1 in the District Court, Surat, which is pending. On 09.09.2024, the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) 20025/2014 (Sonani Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Prime Diamond Tech and Ors.) directed the Surat District Court to endeavor to decide the suit within one year. Respondent No. 2 appears to be a government or official party, represented through counsel via video conference.
The petitioner argues that the copyright registrations in favor of Respondent No. 1 are invalid because the mandatory requirement under Rule 70(9) of the Copyright Rules, 2013 was not followed. Specifically, while submitting Form XIV for registration, Respondent No. 1 was required to give notice to the petitioner (as a potential interested party), which was not done. Thus, the petitioner claims the registrations cannot stand and must be struck off from the Copyright Register for non-compliance with statutory provisions. The petitioner relies on Bharat Tea Suppliers v. Gujarat Tea Traders and Another (2021 SCC OnLine BOM 3637) and an order dated 02.05.2024 by a coordinate bench of this court in C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 750/2022.
Respondent No. 1 counters that the issues in these petitions overlap with those in the pending Surat infringement suit, so the High Court should await its outcome. Respondent No. 1 asserts full compliance with Rule 70(9), and notes that the copyright is not a public document, so no presumption of infringement or dispute arises automatically. Further, the Surat court found no prima facie case for the petitioner, and even the Supreme Court granted only partial relief (direction to maintain accounts and not divulge copyright info to third parties), denying a full injunction against Respondent No. 1's business.
Considering the submissions, the court found it appropriate to await the decision in the pending copyright infringement suit in the District Court, Surat, before proceeding with the rectification petitions. The matters are re-notified for hearing on 28.04.2025.
Disclaimer: The information shared here is intended to serve the public interest by offering insights and perspectives. However, readers are advised to exercise their own discretion when interpreting and applying this information. The content herein is subjective and may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi
No comments:
Post a Comment