Madras High Court
Tractors And Farm Equipment Ltd vs Vraj Tractor Exports on 23 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 23.12.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.ANAND VEKATESH
Civil Suit No.117 of 2006
(Comm.Suit)
Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd.,
Rep.by its Dy.General Manager-Legal
Mr.R.Srinivasan
No.861, Anna Salai
Chennai 600 002. .. Plaintiff
.vs.
Vraj Tractor Exports
B-4, C, Ist Phase
Basni
Jodphur 342005. ..Defendant
Prayer: Civil Suit has been filed under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S.Rules
and Order VII Rule 1 CPC r/w Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copy Rights
Act, 1957, praying to grant a decree and judgment on the followign
terms:-
a) A permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their
men, agents, successors-in-business, assigns, representatives or any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
person claiming through or under them from in any manner infringing
the plaintiffs copyright in the literary work, the unique and distinctive
“part number” and the artistic work in the catalogue with model
numbers, drawings, diagrams etc., by using a identical part number,
model number and the name Massey Ferguson without any
authorization or consent from the plaintiff in any other manner
whatsoever;
b)A permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men,
agents, successors-in-business, assigns, representatives or nay person
claiming through or under them from in any manner passing off or
enabling others to pass off their products as a substitute for the
plaintiff's products by use of identical part number, model number and
the name Massey Ferguson thereby inducing the members of the trade
and public to purchase their products as and for the plaintiff's
products or in any other manner whatsoever;
c)the defendants be directed to remove all references of the
plaintiff's name Massey Ferguson, their unique and distinctive “part
number”, their model numbers etc., from its website
www.vrajtractors.com, or any other website/online material and /or
catalogues, brochures, price lists or disseminating information in any
manner whatsoever;
d)the defendants be ordered and decreed to pay to the Plaintiff
a sum of Rs.10,05,000/- by way of damages for manufacturing and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/7
selling spare parts for plaintiff's tractors without any authorization or
consent of the plaintiff and for committing acts of copyright
infringement and passing off:
e)a Preliminary Decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff
directing the defendants to render a true and faithful account of all
profits earned by them, using plaintiff's part numbers, diagrams,
model numbers etc., and a final decree be passed in favour of the
plaintiff for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by
the defendants after the latter have rendered accounts.
f)the defendant's be directed to surrender to the plaintiff for
destruction, catalogues, drawings, any print material etc., with the
plaintiff's part number, model number and name or any reference
whatsoever to the plaintiff available with the defendants' and the
products manufactured thereon;
g) for costs; and
h)for such other and further reliefs as the nature and
circumstances of the case may require.
For Plaintiff :Mr.Ramkumar Natarajan
for Mrs.Brinda Mohan
For Defendants : Mr.K.Shakespeare
Mr.G.Karthikeyan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/7
JUDGMENT
This suit was filed by the plaintiff with a grievance that the
defendant is infringing the copyright of plaintiff in the literary work
and the plaintiff had sought for various reliefs against the defendant.
This suit was filed in the year 2006.
2.When the matter came up for hearing on 15.12.2021, the
learned counsel for the defendant submitted that the defendant
Company had closed their operation in the year 2011. A document
was filed to that effect. Recording the submissions of the learned
counsel for the defendant, the following order was passed by this
Court.
Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court
on 19.11.2021, the Registry has put up the written
statement in the case bundle.
2.The learned counsel for the defendant
submitted that the defendant Company has closed their
operation from the year 2011 onwards. A document to
that effect was also filed by way of additional typed set
of papers after serving copy to the learned counsel for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/7
the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the plaintiff shall
take instructions and report before this Court.
3.Post this case under the same caption on
23.12.2021.
3.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the
learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the stand taken by the
defendant and which was recorded by this Court on 15.12.2021, can
be taken into account and the suit can be disposed of accordingly.
4.In view of the above, the specific stand taken by the
defendant to the effect that the defendant Company had closed their
operation in the year 2011 and they are no more in existence, is
recorded and the suit is disposed of accordingly. It is made clear that
if at any future point of time, any occasion arises wherein, the
copyright infringement is revived by the defendant, it will be left
open to the plaintiff to file a fresh suit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/7
5.The suit is disposed of in the above terms. In the facts
and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
23.12.2021
KP
Internet: Yes
Inxex: yes/No.
N.ANAND VENKATESH,J.
KP
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Civil Suit No.117 of 2006
(Comm.Suit)
23.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
