PEARSON EDUCATION INC Vs. S M SAIFULLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of a number of applications. The appellant herein is particularly aggrieved by the order passed whereby two applications, one under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure moved by the appellant / plaintiff and the other under order XXXIX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure moved by the respondents / defendants were disposed of. At the time of issuance of summons in the suit, an ad interim injunction in respect of alleged violation of copyright by the defendants was granted. The respondents / defendants filed a reply to the aforesaid application and also filed an independent application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for vacation of interim injunction which was granted.

(2.) After hearing arguments on both the aforesaid applications, the impugned order was passed, which is under challenge in this appeal. The learned Single Judge, while passing the aforesaid order held that the respondent / defendant has merely reproduced some definitions, arrangement of topics, arrangement of analysis and, therefore, it cannot be prima facie said that the books of the defendant / respondent were copies of the plaintiff's books.

(3.) Having held thus, the learned Single Judge proceeded to observe that it is an undisputed fact that the books of the respondents were on scientific and technical subjects written to meet the requirements of the students of universities pursuing studies in MCA etc. and that the said books were bound to have discussion only on the common engineering topics. After recording the aforesaid findings, the learned Single Judge held that on the basis of a few definitions, it cannot be said that the respondents have infringed the copyright of the appellant and that the appellant has miserably failed in showing prima facie that there was an infringement of copyright of the plaintiff's work. The aforesaid findings and the conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge are under challenge in this appeal on which we have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.