Delhi High Court
Autodesk Inc. & Anr. vs Mr.N.Battula & Ors. on 23 March, 2009
Author: Anil Kumar
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) No.230/2009
% Date of Decision: 23.03.2009
Autodesk Inc. & Anr. .... Plaintiffs
Through Mr.Ankush Mahajan, Advocate.
Versus
Mr.N.Battula & Ors. .... Defendants
Through Mr.R.Anand, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be YES
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in NO
the Digest?
IA No.3887/2009
This is an application by the plaintiffs for decreeing the suit in
terms of the settlement arrived at, the terms of settlement are
incorporated in the application.
Under the settlement arrived at between the plaintiffs and
defendants, the defendants have agreed not to use unlicensed software
of plaintiffs or indulge in any act that would amount to infringement of
the plaintiff No.1's copyright in its computer programmes.
The defendants have also estimated the plaintiffs software which
they would be requiring which are also detailed in para 2b of the
application and the defendants have also undertaken and agreed to pay
legal cost of Rs.10 lakhs to the plaintiff No.1. The learned counsel for
CS(OS) No.230/2009 Page 1 of 3
the plaintiffs states that after deducting the TDS @ 11.33% an amount
of Rs.8,86,700/- has been paid as legal cost to the plaintiffs.
The defendants have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.42 lakhs towards
the cost of softwares and after deducting the TDS @ 11.33% the post
dated cheques as security has been given for a sum of Rs.41,35,549/-
to the plaintiffs. On payment of the amount for the softwares to the
distributors, the post dated cheques which have been given in the name
of 'Saikrishna & Associates-Autodesk Account' shall be returned by the
plaintiffs to the defendants. The plaintiffs has also agreed that in case of
decrease in the present price of the softwares which are to be
purchased by the defendants, the benefit of the decrease of the price
shall be given to the defendants.
It is also represented by the defendants that all the disputes have
been resolved by the plaintiffs and the defendants and the application
for recording the settlement and decreeing the suit in terms of the
settlement is signed by the authorized representative of plaintiffs and by
the defendants or their constituted attorney and their counsels. The
application is also supported by the affidavit of Mr.Vishal Ahuja,
constituted attorney of plaintiff company, Mr.N.Battula, defendant No.1,
Director of defendant No.3 and Mr.Chandrashekhar Chowluru,
defendant No.2.
There does not seem to be any impediment in allowing the
application. Consequently, the application is allowed and the suit of the
plaintiffs is to be decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at between
CS(OS) No.230/2009 Page 2 of 3
the parties.
CS(OS) No.230/2009
The parties have settled their dispute in terms of the terms
incorporated in IA No.3887/2009 which has since been allowed.
Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of the
settlement incorporated in IA No.3887/2009. Decree sheet be drawn
where IA No.3887/2009 shall form part of the decree. Parties are left to
bear their own cost. All the pending applications are disposed of.
IA No.3888/2009
This is an application for refund of Rs.50,000/- deposited as
special cost by the plaintiffs through its advocate.
The parties have settled their disputes and the suit has been
decreed in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the application it is allowed
and the sum of Rs.50,000/- deposited as special cost by the plaintiffs
through its advocate is directed to be returned by issuing an
appropriate instrument in favour of 'Saikrishna & Associates', attorney
of the plaintiffs forthwith.
Application is disposed of.
Dasti.
MARCH 23, 2009 ANIL KUMAR, J.
'k'
