M/S.Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd vs Grt Hotels And Resorts Private Limited
2024 Latest Caselaw 300 Mad

Madras High Court

M/S.Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd vs Grt Hotels And Resorts Private Limited on 4 January, 2024

Author: Abdul Quddhose

Bench: Abdul Quddhose

                                                                                        C.S. No.921 of 2017

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 04.01.2024

                                                            CORAM

                                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                      C.S. No.921 of 2017

                     M/s.Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd.,
                     rep. by its Local Field Supervisor
                     Rokesh Parthiban                                              ... Plaintiff

                                                               Vs.

                     1.GRT Hotels and Resorts Private Limited,
                       rep. by its C.E.O. T.Nataraajan

                     2.Hotel GRT Grand Chennai,
                       represented by its General Manager
                       Shabin Sarvotham                                            ... Defendants



                     PRAYER: Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read
                     with Order VII Rule I of C.P.C. and Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copyright
                     Act, 1957 to pass a judgment and decree:
                                  (a)for a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their men,
                     agents, servants, assigns, heirs, representatives, successors or any other
                     person claiming through/under them from in any manner publicly
                     performing or communicating the sound recordings works of the plaintiff to
                     the public or allowing their premises or any premises under their control to
                     be used for the said purpose without license from the plaintiff or in

                     1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                            C.S. No.921 of 2017

                     otherwise infringing copyright in any work owned and licensed by the
                     plaintiff;
                                  (b)costs of the suit.


                                        For Plaintiff        :     Mr.Nirali Atha
                                                                   for Mr.V.V.Sivakumar

                                        For Defendants      :      Ms.P.Siva Sankari
                                                                   for Mr.K.Senthil Kumar

                                                           JUDGMENT

The matter is listed under the caption 'for dismissal' today.

2.A counsel representing the counsel for the plaintiff has addressed

this Court from Bombay through Video Conferencing. Despite the matter

being listed under the caption 'for dismissal' on account of the earlier non

representation of the plaintiff in this matter, the learned counsel

representing the counsel for the plaintiff once again seeks for an

adjournment. As seen from the earlier proceedings, there was no

representation on the side of the plaintiff on 06.12.2023. Thereafter, the

matter was listed under the caption 'for dismissal' on 13.12.2023. On

13.12.2023, the learned counsel representing the counsel for the plaintiff

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

submitted that he is the new counsel for the plaintiff and on that ground an

adjournment was sought for. At the request of the learned counsel, an

adjournment was also granted. However, this Court directed the matter to be

posted under the caption 'for dismissal' today. Today, the learned counsel

for the plaintiff is not ready and the counsel on record is not representing

the matter and instead the counsel representing the counsel on record

addresses this Court through Video Conferencing from Bombay. It can now

be inferred that the plaintiff is not interested in prosecuting this suit.

Accordingly, this suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

04.01.2024

vga

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

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vga

04.01.2024

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