CS(OS) No.2586/2008 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.2586/2008 % Date of Decision: 09.02.2009 Autodesk, Inc & Another …. Plaintiffs Through Mr.Nitin Sharma, Advocate Versus Mr.N.Mishra and others …. Defendants Through Mr. Pradeep Ranjan Tiwary, Advocate for defendants No.1 and 3. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR 1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NO ANIL KUMAR, J. IA No.1844/2009 This is an application by plaintiffs and defendants No.1 and 3 to decree the suit in terms of settlement arrived at between the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 and 3. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs, on instructions, also seeks to delete defendant No.2, who was an ex employ of defendant No.3. The terms of settlement arrived at between plaintiffs and defendants No.1 and 3 are incorporated in the application. Under the settlement, an amount of Rs.4.00 lakh was agreed to be paid through demand drafts in the name of “Saikrishna & Associates” which the CS(OS) No.2586/2008 Page 2 of 3 learned counsel for defendants No.1 and 3 states has already been paid. Learned counsel for plaintiffs also admitted that the amount of Rs.4.00 lakh has been paid to the plaintiffs through Saikrishna & Associates. The defendants have agreed in terms of settlement not to commit breach of settlement terms and they will not use unlicensed software of plaintiff and will not indulge in any act which will amount to infringement of plaintiffs’ copyright in its computer programme. It is stated by the parties that at the time of signing the application for settlement, no software use was found at any computer systems of defendants which were not licensed or which were not legal. The application is signed by the authorized representative of plaintiffs and by defendants No.1 and 3 and their respective counsel. The application is also supported by the affidavits of Mr.Vishal Ahuja, constituted attorney of plaintiff, and Mr.S.N. Mishra, defendant No.1, and the President & Chief Executive Officer of defendant No.3. At the request of counsel for the plaintiffs, defendant No.2 is deleted from the array of parties. Considering the terms of settlement, there does not seem to be any impediment in allowing with settlement between the parties. Consequently, the application is allowed. CS(OS) No.2586/2008 Defendant No.2 is deleted as a party to the suit. The other parties have settled their disputes in terms of settlement incorporated in IA No.1844/2009 which has been allowed. CS(OS) No.2586/2008 Page 3 of 3 Consequently, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties in IA No.1844/2009. Decree sheet be drawn where IA No.1844/2009 shall form part of the decree. All the pending application are also disposed of. Parties are left to bear their own costs. The next date, i.e., May 12, 2009, is cancelled in the facts and circumstances. February 09, 2009 ANIL KUMAR, J. ‘Dev’