The Plaintiff (Interdigital Technology Corp.) approached the Delhi High Court seeking an injunction against Xiaomi (Defendant). The Plea sought a direction to restrain the Defendant from pursuing the anti-suit injunction order.
Facts of the Case
The Plaintiff herein filed a suit against infringement of its Standard Essential Patents (SEP) by Xiaomi. It was alleged that Xiaomi had been using its patented technology without entering into a licensing agreement. On the very same day, the Defendant filed an application, before the Wuhan Court, seeking an anti-suit injunction. And hence, restraining the Plaintiff from pursuing and prosecuting the present suit before the Court.
Plaintiff’s Arguments
Learned Senior Counsel Mr Gourab Banerjee appeared for the Plaintiff. He relied on Modi Entertainment Network v. W. S. G. Cricket Pte Ltd, where it was held that the power of Indian Courts, to grant anti-suit injunctions, against proceedings pending in foreign jurisdictions, stands recognised by the Supreme Court.
Mr.Banerjee further draws attention to the fact that the concept of anti-enforcement injunction is unknown to Indian Law. And even in foreign jurisdictions, the concept of anti-enforcement injunction arises only when a party seeks restraint against the enforcement of a final judgement.
Mr Banerjee further submits that the competence of Indian Courts to grant anti-anti-suit injunctions stands recognised by a Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in Devi Resources Ltd v. Ambo Exports Ltd. And in the facts of the present case, grant of such anti-suit-injunction would be necessary to do complete justice.
Defendant’s Arguments
Mr Saikrishna Rajagopal appeared for the Defendant. He contended that the present suit before the Court is, in its nature, an anti-enforcement injunction, and not an anti-anti-suit injunction.
Mr Rajagopal further submits that the application, of the Plaintiff, was not maintainable, as there was no prayer, in the suit, for an anti-suit injunction.
Court’s Order
The Court observed that the Order of the Wuhan Court directly negates the jurisdiction of this Court. Further, it infringes the authority of this Court to exercise its jurisdiction in accordance with the laws of this country.
Hence, the Single Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar restrained the Chinese electronics giant, Xiaomi from enforcing an anti-suit injunction order passed by Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court.
Click Here to read the judgment.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
