Adobe Incorporated & Ors. vs Yy And Ors

$~21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 13.04.2026
+ FAO (COMM) 103/2026
ADOBE INCORPORATED & ORS. .....Appellants
Through: Ms. Aarshia Behl, Ms. Shruti Baid,
Ms. Aashi Sharma, Ms. Bhavya
Manda, Mr. Suryansh Gupta, Ms.
Yashi Singh and Ms. Ashwarya
Bansal, Advs.
versus

YY AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 23713/2026 & CM APPL. 23714/2026 (Exemptions)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 23823/2026 (For leave to file addl. docs.)
3. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
4. The application stands disposed of.
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 & CM APPL. 23710/2026, CM APPL.
23712/2026

5. This appeal lays a challenge to an order dated 20.02.2026 passed by
the learned District Judge, (Commercial Court-07) South-East District,
Saket Court, New Delhi, whereby, the learned District Judge has rejected the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 1 of 8

application filed by the appellants under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) and a separate application under
Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC.
6. The submission of Ms. Behl, the learned counsel for the appellants is
primarily that the learned District Judge has erred in rejecting the
applications under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC and Order
XXVI Rule 9 CPC at the first date of hearing, by stating as under: -
“…..

31. Having regard to the above, material filed on record is miserably
inadequate to term it sufficient for showing a prima facie case in
Plaintiff’s favour. As Plaintiffs have filed to show any prima facie
case, test for balance for convenience and likelihood of irreparable
loss, also fails, In view of the above observations, the application
under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 CPC seeking ad-interim injunction
is rejected.

32. Plaintiff has proposed to relief of appointment of Local
Commissioner primarily based on the pleas taken in consideration
while deciding the application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2
CPC. In terms of law settled for appointment of Local
Commissioner, it is noted that the Local Commissioner cannot be
appointed for carrying investigation for plaintiff and collecting
evidence on plaintiff’s behalf.


33. For the reasons that plaintiff has not been able to detail
specifically any evidence, the request for appointment of Local
Commissioner at this stage, is not maintainable. The application
under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC r/w Order XXXIX Rule 7 and
Section 151 CPC is also rejected.”

7. She submits that, appropriate would have been for the learned District
Judge to issue at least a notice on the application under Order XXXIX Rules
1 and 2 of the CPC, for the defendants to appear before the Court and
answer the allegations as made in the plaint and the application. She states
that in view of the averments made in the plaint and application a prima
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 2 of 8

facie finding should have been made in favour of the appellants and an
interim relief granted as deemed appropriate. She states that it is the
categorical assertion in the plaint that defendants are using pirated software.
8. She submits that, the appellants’ case is that though the
defendants/respondents have licences in respect of Adobe Acrobat [221
licences], defendants/respondents are also using the same product on
additional machines without any licence. She states that many of these
licences have also not been renewed by the Defendants. It is her submission
that, if a Court Commissioner (CC) is appointed, the report of the CC would
prove the stand taken by the appellants, which would have assisted the
learned District Judge to pass appropriate orders in the injunction
application as also final determination of the suit.
9. She relies upon the judgment of the Division Bench in Autodesk Inc
1
and Ors. V. A.V.T. Shankardass and Ors . to contend that in identical
facts the Division Bench held that appointment of the Court Commissioner
is imperative to preserve the evidence of software piracy. She has drawn our
attention to the observations made by the Division Bench on the issue of
quality of evidence required at an ex-parte stage from the plaintiff with
respect to the proof of infringement.
10. During the course of the hearing, we have been informed that the
learned District Judge after dismissing the applications by the impugned
order, issued summons, to list the matter on 07.04.2026, but the District
Judge did not hold the Court on that day. She states that the matter has been
adjourned to 05.05.2026. She clarifies that the appellant has not taken steps
for issuance of summons as it has preferred the present appeal.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 3 of 8

11. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and after perusing
the order passed by the learned District Judge, we agree with the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants, more
particularly in the facts of this case pertaining to software piracy that even if
the learned District Judge was not inclined to pass an ad-interim ex-parte
order, it should have at least issued notice on the applications under Order
XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, 1908, more so, keeping in view of the
case pleaded by the appellants in the suit as well as in the applications.
12. Having not done that and rejected above said application, we are
restoring the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC
on the board of the learned District Judge and setting aside the order dated
20.02.2026 on the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of
the CPC for the date fixed i.e., 05.05.2026.
13. We are also of the considered opinion that the impugned order insofar
as it dismissed the application under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for
appointment of Local Commissioner was also not merited in view of the
judgment of Autodesk Inc and Ors. (supra). To avoid any further delay in
adjudication, we are proceeding to appoint the Local Commissioner in these
proceedings.
CM APPL. 23711/2026 (For appointment of local commissioner(s) .
14. We find merit in the submission of the appellant that the facts of this
case are identical with Autodesk Inc and Ors. (supra). In the said case as
well the learned Single Judge while declining to grant ad-interim ex-parte
injunction and issuing notice on the injunction application as well as the
summons in the suit, had however dismissed the application seeking

1
MANU/TN/0133/1986, paragraph no. 14
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 4 of 8

appointment of Local Commissioner. The Division Bench in the intra Court
appeal itself proceeded to appoint the Local Commissioner so as to preserve
the evidence of software piracy.
15. Accordingly, we have taken up for consideration the application for
appointment of Local Commissioner being CM APPL. 23711/2026 filed in
this appeal so as to preserve the evidence of infringement/software piracy.
This Court deems it appropriate to appoint two (2) Local Commissioners; as
per the details provided hereinunder:

16. The mandate of the Local Commissioner is as under:
I. The Local Commissioners, along with a representative of the
appellants/plaintiffs (along with technical experts) and their counsel,
shall be permitted to enter upon the premises of the respondents
mentioned hereinabove, or any other location/premises that may be
identified, during the course of the commission, in order to conduct
the search and seizure.
II. The Local Commissioners shall inspect the CPUs/Hard Disks of the
computers, compact discs and/or other storage/replicating media, with
the help of Technical Experts of the appellants/plaintiffs and
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 5 of 8

determine if the aforesaid storage/ replicating media contain
pirated/counterfeit/ unlicensed versions of the appellants’ software
programmes.
III. The Local Commissioners shall make an inventory of the software
program belonging to the appellant contained in computers
systems/laptops/servers/ CPUs/Hard Disks and/or in CDs/ DVDs
and/or upon any other storage media, as well as photocopies of
licenses held, if any;
IV. If the computers and/or other storage/replicating media of the
Defendants are password protected, the defendants shall make
accessible the said password(s) so as to enable the Local
Commissioner to execute the commission.
V. The Local Commissioners shall take into custody all Central
Processing Units (CPUs), servers/ Compact Disks/ DVDs and/or any
other storage media containing illegal/unlicensed/pirated/
unauthorized versions of the appellants/plaintiffs software, identified
by the accompanying technical expert as such and thereafter seal/
seize the same so as to preserve the evidence of unlicensed usage;
VI. In case the premises are found locked, the Local Commissioners shall
be permitted to break open the lock(s), with the help of the local
police, if access to the premises, is denied to the Commissioners.
VII. Upon being requested the concerned jurisdictional police authorities,
the Commissioner of Police/Superintendent of Police and/or the
Station House Officer (‘SHO’) shall render necessary cooperation for
execution of the commissions, as per this order.
VIII. The Local Commissioner is permitted to take photographs and video-
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 6 of 8

graph of the proceedings of the commission, if it is deemed
appropriate.
IX. Both parties shall provide assistance to the Local Commissioner for
carrying out the aforesaid directions.
X. The Local Commissioners while executing the commission, shall
ensure that there is no disruption to the business of the
defendants/respondents, except for the purposes of the execution of
the commission. The commission shall be executed in the peaceful
manner.
XI. The Local Commissioners shall hand over the seized material on
'superdari' to the Respondents/Defendants or their representatives,
who may be directed to give an appropriate undertaking that the
sealed materials will be produced before this Hon'ble Court, as and
when directed;
XII. Copy of the order and complete paper-book shall be served by the
Local Commissioners upon the defendants/respondents at the time of
execution of commissions.
17. The Local Commissioners shall execute the commission within a
period of one [1] week from today and shall submit the report before the
learned District Judge within a period of one [1] week thereafter.
18. The Local Commissioners shall be paid an amount of Rs. 2,25,000/-
each for executing the Local Commissions, the aforesaid fee shall be
excluding the out-of-pocket expenses which they may incur for executing
the commission.
19. In terms of the foregoing, the present application stands disposed of.
20. Either the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff or the learned
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 7 of 8

Local Commissioners are directed to collect a certified copy of this order
from the Registry (Dispatch Branch) before for execution of the
Commission.
21. The Local Commissioners shall carry the certified copy of this Order
for execution of the Commission and a copy of the same shall be served
upon the Respondent/Defendant by the Local Commissioners at the time of
the execution of the Commissions.
22. The order passed today shall not be uploaded for a period of one (1)
week to enable the execution of the commissions.
23. This order be given as Dasti under the signature of Court Master.
24. In view of this order, the application under Order Order XXXIX
Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC filed by the appellants before the learned District
Judge which had been dismissed vide the impugned order shall stand
revived.
25. The learned District Judge shall consider the said application along
with the report to be submitted by the Local Commissioners. In the
meantime, we make it clear that after the commission is executed the
appellants shall take steps to serve summons and a copy of the suit to the
respondents herein for the date fixed before the learned District Judge.
26. With the aforesaid directions, the appeal stands disposed of.
27. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
APRIL 13, 2026/ mt/AJ
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RASHMI DABAS
Signing Date:22.04.2026
11:36:02
FAO (COMM) 103/2026 Page 8 of 8