Less Than Equals Three Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Paras Mehra & Ors

CS(COMM) 914/2018

The dispute involves Less Than Equals Three Services Pvt. Ltd., which alleges that its founders and employees established a competing business using the source code and MySQL database of the petitioner's website, quickcompany.in. The core legal challenge raised by the defendants was whether the company could maintain a copyright infringement suit without clearly pleading the identity of the author and an agreement vesting the rights in the company. The court analyzed this issue against previous judgments, ultimately finding that the plaintiff's disclosures were sufficient to overcome the preliminary objection.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court
Case Number
CS(COMM) 914/2018
Judge(s)
Prateek Jalan

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in copyright matters before Delhi High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Less Than Equals Three Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Paras Mehra & Ors is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

copyrightCivil Appeal No.6709 of 2004

M/S. K.R.C.D. (I) Pvt. Ltd.vsCommnr. Of Central Excise, Mumbai

The dispute concerned whether the royalty paid for music embedded in master CDs should be included in the assessable value when M/S. K.R.C.D. (I) Pvt. Ltd. manufactured duplicate CDs on a job work basis. The appellant argued that since they only copied the content and did not exploit the intellectual property, no royalty could be charged. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant.

copyrightMisc. Appeal No. 316 of 2024

Samriddhi Rice Mill Private LimitedvsThe Controller General Of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, and Others

The appeal was filed by Samriddhi Rice Mill Private Limited challenging an order passed by the Deputy Registrar of Copy Rights. The respondent argued that only the Delhi High Court had jurisdiction because the Deputy Registrar's office is in New Delhi, citing amendments to the Copyright Act and judicial precedents on forum shopping. The Jharkhand High Court ultimately held that it possesses the necessary territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

copyrightCS (Comm) No. 87/24

Dr. Nidhi GulativsM/s. Repro Books Limited

The plaintiff filed a suit seeking permanent injunction and damages against Repro Books Limited (and Amazon Retail India Pvt. Ltd.) for the unauthorized reproduction and sale of her copyrighted Ph.D thesis, "Construction of Childhood in Cinema," as a book. The court found that Defendant No. 1 infringed upon the exclusive rights of the plaintiff by selling a word-for-word copy without permission or royalty.

copyrightC.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 715/2022

Manju Singal Proprietor Singla Food ProductsvsDeepak Kumar, Deepak Manocha, Sara Sales and Anr.

Manju Singal Proprietor Singla Food Products filed a petition seeking rectification of a conflicting copyright registration held by Deepak Kumar. The petitioner claimed ownership over their artistic packaging design for 'Gulchhare' since 2009, asserting that the respondent's subsequent registration was based on an identical and slavish imitation. After examining the works, the Delhi High Court found that the respondent's work lacked originality compared to the petitioner's earlier creation.

copyrightCommercial Appeal No.438 of 2022

M/S Map SystemsvsM/S Informatic Publishing Limited

M/S Map Systems appealed against an interim order passed by the Commercial Court that confirmed an ex-parte temporary injunction against them. The plaintiff, M/S Informatic Publishing Limited, claimed that the defendants had misappropriated its proprietary remote access solution, 'RemotLog,' to create a competing product called 'MapMyAccess.' The Karnataka High Court found that the trial court's order was vague and lacked proper reasoning regarding the grant of injunction. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in part, setting aside the temporary injunction and remitting the matter back to the Trial Court for a fresh hearing.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Copyright infringement or licensing dispute?

From digital piracy to content licensing, Arctic's copyright practice covers enforcement, licensing structuring, and fair-use defences.

Speak to a specialist →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar copyright matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call