Karnataka High Court
Ankush Lamba vs M/S Sorting Hat Technologies Private ... on 28 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
COMAP No. 496 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.496 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
ANKUSH LAMBA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
S/O. SUDESH KUMAR LAMBA,
R/AT.HOUSE NO.12,
NEW AMRAPALI COLONY,
PACHPEDI NAKA DHAMTARI ROAD,
RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH-492001.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SAMMITH. S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S. SORTING HAT TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LTD.,
Digitally
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES
signed by ACT, 2013 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
SUMA MARUTHI INFOTECH CENTER, 3RD FLOOR, A-BLOCK,
Location:
HIGH DOMLUR, KORAMANGALA,
COURT OF INNER RING ROAD,
KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560071
REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
HARISH SASIKUMAR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. DHANANJAYA JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. KASHYAP N.NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR
RESPONDENT)
THIS COMAP / COMMERCIAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 13(1A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, READ
WITH SECTION 37(1)(B) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
COMAP No. 496 of 2023
ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS OF ARBITRATION
APPLICATION NO.403/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED LXXXVIII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-
89 COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU) AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 12.10.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU (CCH-89) ON THE
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS 1 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT
UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT,
1996 READ WITH 151 OF CPC IN COM.A.A.403/2023, AS CONTAINED
IN ANNEXURE A AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
R. NATARAJ J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The appellant has challenged an ex-parte interim
order passed by LXXXVIII Additional City Civil & Sessions
Judge (Commercial Division) Bengaluru in Commercial
Arbitration Application No.403/2023 dated 12.10.2023, by
which, the appellant was restrained by an order of
injunction from publishing, uploading, displaying or
telecasting the "Educator content" on YouTube, Telegram
channel or any other website including his own YouTube
channel "BANKING CHRONICLE" and mobile app "Yes
Officer" till the next date of hearing.
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
2. The appellant contends that the respondent
initiated arbitration proceedings before the Commercial
Court for resolution of a dispute between the respondent
and the appellant and in the said proceedings, the
respondent filed an application under Section 9 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for an interim
injunction on the aforesaid terms. He submits that the
Trial Court without considering the consequences of an ex-
parte interim injunction as sought for, granted the same.
He submits that attempts made by him for modification of
the interim order proved futile, as regular Court sittings
were not happening. He therefore, prays that the
impugned order passed by the Trial Court be dissolved.
3. Per contra, the learned senior counsel
representing the respondent submits that the parties are
governed by the terms of the agreement dated
22.12.2021 which inter alia, contained a clause for
settlement of dispute through arbitration. He submits that
the appellant after entering into a contract and giving
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
exclusive rights to transmit "educator content" formulated
by the appellant, he started publishing, uploading,
displaying the "educator content" on his YouTube channel
and mobile app and thereby infringed the contractual
obligations. He further submits that the appellant may as
well go before the Trial Court to seek modification of the
impugned order.
4. A perusal of the documents placed on record
along with the appeal discloses that an agreement was
entered into between the appellant and the respondent, in
terms of which, the respondent was authorized/licenced to
commercially exploit the "educator content" formulated by
the appellant. The dispute between the appellant and the
respondent seems to have arisen in view of the appellant
publishing, uploading and displaying the content on his
YouTube channel and mobile app. Therefore, the
respondent was justified in approaching the Commercial
Court seeking for resolution of the dispute between the
appellant and the respondent. No doubt, the appellant was
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
entitled to seek modification of the ex-parte order granted
by the Trial Court or approach this Court challenging the
ex-parte order. However, now that the appellant has filed
objections to the application filed by the respondent for
interim injunction and since the pleadings before the Trial
Court is sufficient to consider the application on merits, we
refrain from passing any order on merits. Instead, we
deem it appropriate to direct the Trial Court to consider
the objections/applications, if any, filed by the appellant
for dissolution/modification of the ex-parte interim order
granted by the Trial Court, in a time frame.
5. In view of the above, this appeal is disposed
off directing the Trial Court to consider the objections filed
by the appellant to the application seeking an ex-parte
interim order, within a period of one month from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
6. The Trial Court shall decide the
applications/objections, if any, filed by the appellant
seeking modification of the ex-parte interim order,
NC: 2023:KHC:47064-DB
uninfluenced by any of the observations made in the
aforesaid paragraphs. It is needless to mention that the
Trial Court shall try to dispose off the
applications/objections, if any, filed by the appellant, as
early as possible, at any rate, within 30 days from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open for
the appellant to file appropriate application before the Trial
Court for advancement of case and if the appellant moves
an application, the Court shall take it up for consideration
at the earliest.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
HJ
