1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.95/2005. (Terna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Through its Managing Director Vs. Sanjivani (Takali) Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Through its Managing Director.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.AB Tele, Adv. For petitioner; Mr.VD Hon, Adv. For sole respondent. ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 19 th November, 2010. ... 1) Heard. 2) By order dated 16.2.2006, Rule was issued. However, the learned Judge, seized with the Regular Civil Suit No. 2/2001, was permitted to record the evidence, but not to pronounce the judgment. 3) An objection was raised to the jurisdiction of the court to decide the disputes concerning Copy Rights. By virtue of Section 62 of the Copy Rights Act, the Court has recorded that it has jurisdiction to try the suit and the objection of the defendant was rejected. 4) On analyzing the findings of the learned Judge below Exhibit-12 in RCS No. 2/2001, I find there is no error. I have indicated herein above, this court has 2 directed to proceed with the suit. Consequently, if the evidence is recorded, the learned Judge, seized with RCS No.2/2001, shall also pronounce a judgment de hors pendency of the CRA. 5) CRA lacks merits, dismissed. No costs. Rule discharged. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/