VAREHOUSE INFOTECH CEEBROS ARCADE Vs. SAP AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal is to an order passed by a learned Single Judge on 19th November, 2009 in IA No. 11153 of 2009 in CS(OS) No. 623 of 2009. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge rejected the contention of the Appellant that this Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit and also declined to return the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). We affirm the view of the learned Single Judge.

(2.) A suit was filed by the Respondents for a permanent injunction restraining the Appellant from infringing their copyright in SAP software (used for Enterprise Resource Planning), for damages and rendition of accounts etc. The territorial jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the Respondents as mentioned in paragraph 26 of the plaint which reads as follows:

(3.) The Appellant, in its written statement, submitted that reliance placed by the Respondents on Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (for short the Act) is wrong and ill-founded. It was submitted that this Court did not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. An application was also filed by the Appellant under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC reiterating its submission that this Court lacked territorial jurisdiction. It was submitted that the Appellant is neither residing nor carrying on business within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.