M/S.Smart Brain Co. Ltd vs Brainobrain Kids Academy Pvt. Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 3869 Mad

                                                                         C.S.No.788 of 2005

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   DATED : 01.03.2022

                                                         CORAM

                                  THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

                                                   C.S.No.788 of 2005

                     1. M/s.Smart Brain Co. Ltd.,
                        a Limited Company
                        represented by its
                        Power Agent P.Govindarajan
                        No.80, Pattanakaran 20 link 8
                        Suanluange, Bangkok 10250,
                        Thailand and also having office
                        at No.3, 1st Cross Street,
                        Near Nandi Statue, West CIT Nagar,
                        Chennai - 600 035.

                     2. Smart Brain International,
                        Rep. by its National Franchisee,
                        P.Govindarajan
                        having its Corporate office at
                        No.3, 1st Cross Street,
                        Near Nandi Statue, West CIT Nagar,
                        Chennai - 600 035.                              ... Plaintiffs

                                                           Vs.

                     1. Brainobrain Kids Academy Pvt. Ltd.,
                        No.36, Melony Road,
                        T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.

                     2. M/s.Smart Brain India P Ltd.,
                        rep. by its Managing Director,
                        Mr.S.Anand
                        No.36, Malony Road,
                        Opp. Hindi Prachar Sabha,
                        T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.

                     3. S.Anand Subramanian
                        No.36, Melony Road,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/5
                                                                                           C.S.No.788 of 2005

                         T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.                                      ... Defendants


                                  Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S. Rules read with Order VII Rule
                     1 of CPC under Sections 51, 55, & 62 of Copyright Act 1958, praying for a
                     judgment and decree as follows :


                                  a) a permanent injunction restraining the first defendant, its partners,
                     proprietors, their sons, daughters, servants, agents, distributors, stockists,
                     representatives, assigns or any one acting under them from infringing the
                     applicants' copy right in the Artistic work of Braino Brain by using the
                     Advanced “Abacus Brain Development Programme” to teach Technical know
                     how and adopt the concept, or in any manner using the applicants' Artistic
                     work “Smart Brain” with advanced “Abacus Brain Development Programme” to
                     teach Technical know how and adopt the concept and also the same is
                     publishing through internet either in the name of www.smartbrainindia.com or
                     www.brainobrain.com, newspaper, magazine etc.


                                  b) direct the 3rd defendant to handover all books printing, teaching
                     methods, technical informations, syllabus, curriculam, issuing merit certificates
                     to the plaintiffs in respect of the Abacus Brain Development Programme.


                                  c) a preliminary decree be passed in favour of the plaintiffs directing the
                     1st defendant to render an account of profit made by using the plaintiffs'
                     technical know how of Smart Brain, a programme about Abacus Brain
                     Development Programme and a final decree be passed in favour of the
                     plaintiffs for the amount of profits thus found to have been made by the third
                     defendant after the latter has rendered accounts.



                                                 For Plaintiffs   : Mr.P.Subba Reddy


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     2/5
                                                                                        C.S.No.788 of 2005

                                                For Defendants : M/s.Sai Associates

                                                         JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the plaintiffs would submit that the prayer

sought for in the suit has become infructuous. Hence, he seeks permission of

this Court to withdraw this petition. He has also made an endorsement in the

plaint to the following effect :

“Nothing Survives and the suit is infructuous. Hence, the suit may be dismissed as withdrawn”

2. In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned

counsel for the plaintiffs, this Civil Suit is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.

01.03.2022 raja Index : yes/no Internet : yes/no

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S.No.788 of 2005

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN.J.,

raja

C.S.No.788 of 2005

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.S.No.788 of 2005

01.03.2022 (2/2)

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis