Prime Diamond Tech Vs Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd. : 07.07.2025:Special Civil Application Nos. 9066 of 2025:High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad:Hon’ble the Chief Justice Mrs. Justice Sunita Agarwal and Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.N. Ray
In the case of Prime Diamond Tech & Ors. vs Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., R/Special Civil Application Nos. 9066 and 9073 of 2025, decided on 07.07.2025 by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, a division bench examined a dispute involving access to confidential trade secret information in a pending commercial suit concerning copyright infringement and alleged misuse of proprietary technology in the diamond processing industry.
The factual background involves a copyright and trade secret infringement suit filed by Sonani Jewels Pvt. Ltd. against Prime Diamond Tech and its associated defendants. The plaintiff alleged that defendants 2 to 5, who were former employees, illegally accessed and used the plaintiff’s proprietary information relating to HPHT (High Pressure High Temperature) diamond treatment technology after joining the defendant company.
The plaintiff claimed that these trade secrets included technical know-how, design drawings, process mechanisms, chemical compositions, and other confidential data, which were unlawfully replicated to develop competing products. To support its claim, the plaintiff submitted three sealed envelopes containing its confidential information along with the plaint and secured a court-appointed Local Commissioner to inspect the defendant’s factory premises. During the commission proceedings in May 2021, data, photographs, and files from the defendant's premises were collected and sealed.
The procedural background reveals that the trial court in Surat, while dealing with Commercial TM C.S. No. 38 of 2021, passed an order on 25.06.2025 allowing both the defendants’ applications (Exhs. 124 and 125) to access the plaintiff’s sealed confidential documents and the plaintiff’s application (Exh. 134) to access the data collected during the local commission.
The Commercial Court had initially set up a Confidentiality Club and provided limited access to certain materials, such as photographs and videos, but had restricted broader access to highly confidential material. Dissatisfied with the 25.06.2025 order granting wider access, both parties filed special civil applications before the High Court, seeking to prevent disclosure of their respective confidential information to the other side.
The core dispute before the High Court was whether the parties in a copyright infringement suit could be permitted to access each other’s confidential trade secret data and documents, particularly when such materials were protected under claims of confidentiality and involved sensitive technical know-how.
The defendants argued that the Court Commissioner exceeded the scope of the commission by indiscriminately copying all types of data from their systems, while the plaintiff sought access to this data to substantiate its claims of trade secret theft. Both parties objected to disclosing their respective confidential information to the rival party.
High Court analyzed the scope of confidentiality in intellectual property litigation, particularly where trade secrets are at stake. The Court noted that divulging trade secrets to rival parties would defeat the very purpose of confidentiality protections.
It emphasized that in a copyright infringement suit, sharing trade secret data with the opposing party is antithetical to the legal safeguards surrounding proprietary information. The Court observed that the Commercial Court’s order of 25.06.2025, allowing advocates for both parties to access the confidential data without adequate reasoning, overlooked the critical issue of trade secret protection. The previous order of 26.05.2021, which had already regulated the Confidentiality Club and imposed conditions on access, was not duly considered by the trial court.
In its decision, the High Court quashed the Commercial Court’s order dated 25.06.2025 and rejected both the defendants' applications (Exhs. 124 and 125) and the plaintiff’s application (Exh. 134) for access to each other’s confidential information. The Court directed the Commercial Court to proceed with the trial expeditiously, in compliance with the Supreme Court's directions dated 09.09.2024 mandating disposal of the suit within one year. The High Court clarified that all pending applications and objections, including those related to the Local Commissioner’s report, should be decided by the trial court at the appropriate stage, without the present decision influencing the final outcome. It further held that neither party, nor their advocates, should be given access to the rival party’s trade secret information at this stage. The Commercial Court was left free to form its own opinion during trial, based on the evidence presented, while ensuring fairness and protection of proprietary data.
