Surjeet Publication v. F.J. Monkhouse and H.R. Wikinson

Delhi High Court · 26 Sep 2023 · 2023:DHC:7087
C. Hari Shankar
C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 873/2022
2023:DHC:7087
intellectual_property petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed copyright petitions for default and nonprosecution after the petitioner failed to respond or appear following the transfer of cases from the abolished Copyright Board.

Full Text
Translation output
C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 873/2022 and another connected matter
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 873/2022 SURJEET PUBLICATION ..... Petitioner
Through: None
VERSUS
F.J. MONKHOUSE AND H.R. WIKINSON AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar
Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. M. Sriram, Mr. Krishnan V., Advocates.
C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 874/2022 SURJEET PUBLICATIONS ..... Petitioner
Through: None
VERSUS
CLAIRE SELLTIZ MORTON DEUTSCH AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar
Mishra, Mr. Sagar Mehlawat, Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Mr. M. Sriram, Mr. Krishnan V., Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR O R D E R (O R A L)
26.09.2023
JUDGMENT

1. These are matters which were transferred from the Copyright C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 873/2022 and another connected matter Board. As the petitions had been filed in 2007 and were listed before the High Court for the first time 15 years thereafter in 2022 on the abolition of the Copyright Board, this Court, vide order dated 23 November 2022, had directed notice to be issued to the petitioner, to ascertain whether the petitioner was interested in prosecuting this petition any further.

2. All attempts at serving the petitioner have been futile. The petitioner is stated to have left the address provided by the petitioner in the memo of parties. This Court had, on 16 February 2023, therefore, directed notice to be served on leaned Counsel for the parties. The Registry reports that said direction could not be complied with, as the details of the names and addresses of the Counsel for parties is also not forthcoming. The record reveals that there is no Vakalatnama on record.

3. As such, it appears that these petitions are no longer worthy of prosecution. They are, accordingly, dismissed for default and nonprosecution.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J SEPTEMBER 26, 2023