Universal City Studios Llc. & Ors. vs Dembed2.Com & Ors.
- Court
- Delhi High Court
$~O-33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
# CNR No. DLHC010460462022
+ CS(COMM) 851/2022
Date of Decision : 30.10.2026
IN THE MATTER OF:
1. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS LLC.
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
100 UNIVERSAL CITY PLAZA, UNIVERSAL CITY,
CA 91608, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
2. WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
4000 WARNER BOULEVARD, BURBANK,
CALIFORNIA 91522, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
3. COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
10202 W. WASHINGTON BLVD., CULVER CITY,
CA 90232-3195 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
4. NETFLIX STUDIOS, LLC
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
100 WINCHESTER CIR LOS GATOS
CA, 95032-1815, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
5. PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
5555 MELROSE AVENUE, HOLLYWOOD,
CA, 90038, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
6. DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
500 S. BUENA VISTA, BURBANK,
CA, 91521, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
.....PLAINTIFFS
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Through: Ms. Suhasini Raina, Mr. Sidharth
Chopra, Mr. Raghav Goyal, Ms.
Shruti Dhama and Mr. Abhay Aren,
Advs.
versus
1. DEMBED2.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
C1958A482F66492BA5666F69A9DB0D40.PROTECT@WITH HEL
DFORPRIVACY.COM
2. BOLLYFLIX.DAY
BOLLYFLIX.CYOU
BOLLYFLIX.VIP
CONTACT INFORMATION:
[email protected],
[email protected]
3. DIVICAST.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
4. GOGOHD.NET
GOLOAD.IO
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
EBFEC9E6DB64483DBC5F0D4302A9E9FE.PROTECT@
WITHHEL
DFORPRIVACY.COM
5. KUTTYMOVIES.MONSTER
KUTTYMOVIES24.COM
KUTTYMOVIES24.ORG
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
868D5108E6EC45A8B3FD4581B20BF326.PROTECT@WITHH
ELDFORPRIVACY.COM
6. MOVIE4ME.STORE
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
MOVIE4ME.BOND
MOVIES4ME.ONE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
[email protected],
[email protected]
7. MOVIESMINT.IN
CONTACT INFORMATION: - [email protected]
8. MOVIEZWAP.VIN
MOVIEZWAP.RUN
MOVIEZWAP.PICS
CONTACT INFORMATION:
[email protected],
[email protected]
9. PRMOVIES.RUN
PRMOVIES.TEAM
PRMOVIES.TEL
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
[email protected]
10. SERIESHD.WATCH
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
11. TAMILPRINT.ART
TAMILPRINT22.XYZ
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
12. UHDMOVIES.SITE
UHDMOVIES.CO
UHDMOVIES.APP
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
13. ATRIA CONVERGENCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
99A/113A, MANORAYANA PALYA
R.T. NAGAR BANGALORE – 560032
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
ALSO AT:
ND RD
2 AND 3 FLOOR, NO. 1,
INDIAN EXPRESS BUILDING, QUEEN‟S ROAD,
BANGALORE 560001 KARNATAKA
[email protected] ;
[email protected]
14. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.
BHARAT SANCHAR BHAWAN, REGULATION CELL
5TH FLOOR, HARISH CHANDRA MATHUR LANE
JANPATH, NEW DELHI -110001
[email protected]; [email protected]
[email protected]; [email protected]
15. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.
AIRTEL CENTRE, TOWER-A, 6TH FLOOR
„A‟WING, PLOT NO.16, UDYOG VIHAR
PH - IV, GURGAON – 122016
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected] ;
[email protected];
[email protected]
16. HATHWAY CABLE & DATACOM PVT. LTD.
'RAHEJAS',4 FLOOR, MAIN AVENUE
SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI-400054
[email protected];
[email protected]
17. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.
5TH FLOOR, MAHANAGAR DOORSANCHAR SADAN
9, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD
NEW DELHI – 110003
[email protected]; [email protected]
[email protected]
18. RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LIMITED
RCP 14 (TC 23 ), PHASE 4,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
B-BLOCK , 3RD FLOOR,
C 4 130 TWANE- BELAPUR ROAD,
GANSOLI,
NAVI MUMBAI- 400701
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
19. SHYAM SPECTRA PVT. LTD.
PLOT NO. 258,
OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PHASE III,
NEW DELHI – 110020
ALSO AT:
RD
PLOT NO. 21-22, 3 FLOOR
UDYOG VIHAR, PHASE IV, GURUGRAM -122015
[email protected]; [email protected]
20. TATA TELESERVICES LTD.
A, E & F BLOCKS
VOLTAS PREMISES - T. B. KADAM MARG
CHINCHPOKLI, MUMBAI – 400033
ALSO AT:
JEEVAN BHARATI TOWER I,
10 TH FLOOR, 124,
CONNAUGHT CIRCUS,
NEW DELHI - 110001
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]
21. VODAFONE INDIA LIMITED
VODAFONE HOUSE,
PENINSULA CORPORATE PARK,
GANPATRAO KADAM MARG,
LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 013 INDIA
ALSO AT:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
BIRLA CENTURION,
10TH FLOOR, PLOT NO.794,
B WING, PANDURANG BUDHKAR MARG,
WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 030 INDIA
[email protected];
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
22. DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS
THROUGH SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND IT,
20, SANCHAR BHAWAN, ASHOKA ROAD,
NEW DELHI – 110001
[email protected], [email protected],
23. MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (DIT) CYBER LAWS &
ESECURITY),
ELECTRONICS NIKETAN, 6, CGO COMPLEX,
LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI – 110003
[email protected]
24. ASHOK KUMARS
25. MOVIESMOD.NET
CONTACT INFORMATION : [email protected] ;
DB7402C503AA4770B4A8D1C7B093C000.PROTECT@WITHH
ELDFORPRIVACY.COM
26. PLEXMOVIES.XYZ
CONTACT INFORMATION : [email protected]
27. MOVIEZVERSE.ORG
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
CONTACT INFORMATION : [email protected]
28. UHDMOVIES.ONE
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
29. UHDMOVIES.VIP
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
30. UHDMOVIES.WORLD
CONTACT INFORMATION:[email protected]
31. UHDMOVIES.ORG.IN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
32. PRMOVIES.CITY
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
33. PRMOVIES.BIO
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
34. PRMOVIES.HELP
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
35. PRMOVIES.VIN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
36. MOVIESMINT.NET
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
[email protected]
37. UHDMOVIES.BIO
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
38. BOLLYFLIX.TAX
CONTACT INFORMATION:
[email protected],
[email protected]
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
39. BOLLYFLIX.KIM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
40. BOLLYFLIX.COOL
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
41. KUTTYMOVIES.IT.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
42. KUTTYMOVIES1.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
0947CCE9617D484E9B469CEFAD0D0792.PROTECT@WITHH
ELDFORPRIVACY.COM
43. UHDMOVIES.RUN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
44. UHDMOVIES.ASIA
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
45. UHDMOVIES.ZIP
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
46. PRMOVIES.RENT
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
47. PRNMOVIES.LOAN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
48. PRNMOVIES.FAN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
49. KUTTYMOVIES.COM.BZ
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
50. KUTTYMOVIES.MEX.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
51. KUTTYMOVIES.GR.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
52. MOVIEZWAP.BID
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
53. MOVIEZWAP.HAIR
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
54. MOVIEZWAP.CYOU
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
55. BOLLYFLIX.FI
CONTACT INFORMATION:
[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
56. BOLLYFLIX.NINJA
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
57. BOLLYFLIX.HOW
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
58. BOLLYFLIX.TO
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
[email protected]
59. BOLLYFLIX.REVIEW
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
60. BOLLYFLIX.BAND
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
61. BOLLYFLIX.CITY
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
62. BOLLYFLIX.CASH
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
63. PRMOVIES.PW
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
64. PRNMOVIES.AGENCY
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
65. UHDMOVIES.ICU
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
66. UHDMOVIES.DAD
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
67. BOLLYFLIX.PHD
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
[email protected]
68. NEW.BOLLYFLIXPRO.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
B28FE82606364D7892DB73762BAC7097.PROTECT@WITHH
ELDFORPRIVACY.COM
69. BOLLYFLIX.MEME
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
EC3C81D5F3004822AA04340FA7A26D16.PROTECT@WITHHE
LDFORPRIVACY.COM
70. PRMOVIES.LAND
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
71. PRMOVIES.EMAIL
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
E067431868E4435EB88CEA3C36448F4C.PROTECT@WITHHE
LDFORPRIVACY.COM
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
72. PRMOVIES.TAXI
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
73. PRMOVIES.AGENCY
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
E676ED452C0D4CDA97574EB48DDD543D.PROTECT@WITHH
ELDFORPRIVACY.COM
74. PRMOVIES.BID
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
30603811610941D5ADCA3F5AA3A8FD16.PROTECT@WITHHE
LDFORPRIVACY.COM
75. PRMOVIES.IM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
76. UHDMOVIES.WALES
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
77. UHDMOVIES.FYI
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
78. UHDMOVIES.BET
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
79. UHDMOVIES.BEER
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
80. BOLLYFLIX.FO
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
81. BOLLYFLIX.ARMY
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
[email protected]
82. BOLLYFLIX.DANCE
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
83. BOLLYFLIX.AFRICA
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
84. NEW.BOLLYFLIXPRO.COM
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
85. PRMOVIES.DESIGN
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
86. PRMOVIES.YOGA
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
87. PRMOVIES.HOUSE
CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected],
[email protected]
.....DEFENDANTS
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
JUDGEMENT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
I.A. 29890/2026 (for summary judgment)
1. The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under
Order XIIIA read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(„CPC‟), as applicable to commercial disputes under the Commercial Courts
Act, 2015, read with Rule 27 of the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property
Rights Division Rules, 2022 („IPD Rules‟), seeking a summary judgment in
the suit and its consequent disposal.
2. Two questions, therefore, arise for consideration: firstly , whether the
application is maintainable at the present stage of the suit; and secondly ,
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
whether the plaintiffs have satisfied the test laid down in Rule 3 of Order
XIIIA CPC, namely, that the defendants have no real prospect of
successfully defending the claim and that there is no other compelling
reason why the claim should not be disposed of before recording oral
evidence.
3. The present suit was instituted seeking, inter alia , a decree of
permanent injunction restraining defendant nos. 1 to 12 („Original
Defendant Websites‟) and the mirror/redirect/alphanumeric variations of
defendant nos. 1 to 12 from infringing the plaintiffs‟ exclusive rights in their
cinematograph films, an illustrative list of which is set out in paragraph 30
of the plaint. It is contended that the plaintiffs‟ cinematograph films,
whether first published in India or outside the territory of India, are
protected as „works‟ under the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957
(„Act‟).
4. The expression „work‟ is defined under Section 2(y) of the Act and
includes a cinematograph film. The plaintiffs claim to be the authors and/or
first owners of copyright in their cinematograph films under Section 17 of
the Act, and claim protection in India in respect of films first published
outside India by virtue of Section 40 of the Act. The plaintiffs have claimed
rights over, inter alia , the following cinematograph films:
Studio Film Year
Universal The Purge: Election Year 2016
Universal Straight Outta Compton 2015
Warner Suicide Squad 2016
Warner The Conjuring 2 2016
Warner Wonder Woman 2017
Warner A Star Is Born 2018
Warner Aquaman 2018
Warner Friends 1994-2004
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Warner Batman 2022
Columbia Miracles from Heaven 2016
Columbia This is the End 2013
Netflix Ghost Stories 2020
Netflix Stranger Things - Season 3 2019
Netflix Triple Frontier 2019
Netflix Ibiza 2018
Netflix Stranger Things - Season 2 2017
Netflix Stranger Things - Season 1 2016
Netflix Mob Psycho 2016
Paramount Transformers: Age of
2014
Extinction
Paramount Ghost in the Shell 2017
Paramount xXx: Return ofXander Cage 2017
DEI Mulan 2020
DEI Finding Dory 2016
DEI The Jungle Book 2016
5. It is the case of the plaintiffs that defendant nos. 1 to 12 and 25 to 87
are rogue websites which host, stream and make available the plaintiffs‟
original content for streaming and/or downloading, without any licence or
authorisation from the plaintiffs. Defendant nos. 13 to 21 are internet and
telecom service providers („ISPs‟), defendant no. 22 is the Department of
Telecommunications („DoT‟) and defendant no. 23 is the Ministry of
Electronics and Information Technology („MeitY‟). Defendant no. 24 has
been arrayed as „Ashok Kumar‟ to cover unknown domains and website
operators that may be discovered during the proceedings. The list of the
defendant websites is extracted as under:
LIST OF DEFENDANT WEBSITES
Defendant Nos. Domain(s)
1 dembed2.com
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Defendant Nos. Domain(s)
bollyflix.day
bollyflix.cyou
2
bollyflix.vip
3 divicast.com
gogohd.net
4
goload.io
kuttymovies.monster
5
kuttymovies24.com
kuttymovies24.org
movie4me.store
movie4me.bond
6
movies4me.one
7 moviesmint.in
moviezwap.vin
moviezwap.run
moviezwap.pics
8
prmovies.run
prmovies.team
9
prmovies.tel
10 serieshd.watch
tamilprint.art
11
tamilprint22.xyz
uhdmovies.site
12
uhdmovies.co
uhdmovies.app
25 moviesmod.net
26 plexmovies.xyz
27 moviezverse.org
28 uhdmovies.one
29 uhdmovies.vip
30 uhdmovies.world
31 uhdmovies.org.in
32 prmovies.city
33 prmovies.bio
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Defendant Nos. Domain(s)
34 prmovies.help
35 prmovies.vin
36 moviesmint.net
37 uhdmovies.bio
38 bollyflix.tax
39 bollyflix.kim
40 bollyflix.cool
41 kuttymovies.it.com
42 kuttymovies1.com
43 uhdmovies.run
44 uhdmovies.asia
45 uhdmovies.zip
46 prmovies.rent
47 prnmovies.loan
48 prnmovies.fan
49 kuttymovies.com.bz
50 kuttymovies.mex.com
51 kuttymovies.gr.com
52 moviezwap.bid
53 moviezwap.hair
54 moviezwap.cyou
55 bollyflix.fi
56 bollyflix.ninja
57 bollyflix.how
58 bollyflix.to
59 bollyflix.review
60 bollyflix.band
61 bollyflix.city
62 bollyflix.cash
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Defendant Nos. Domain(s)
63 prmovies.pw
64 prnmovies.agency
65 uhdmovies.icu
66 uhdmovies.dad
67 bollyflix.phd
68 new.bollyflixpro.com
69 bollyflix.meme
70 prmovies.land
71 prmovies.email
72 prmovies.taxi
73 prmovies.agency
74 prmovies.bid
75 prmovies.im
76 uhdmovies.wales
77 uhdmovies.fyi
78 uhdmovies.bet
79 uhdmovies.beer
80 bollyflix.fo
81 bollyflix.army
82 bollyflix.dance
83 bollyflix.africa
84 new.bollyflixpro.com
85 prmovies.design
86 prmovies.yoga
87 prmovies.house
6. On 12.12.2022, this Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in
favour of the plaintiffs in I.A. 20682/2022 filed under Order XXXIX Rules
1 and 2 CPC. Paragraphs 25 to 28 of the said order read as under:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
“25. Accordingly, the defendants no. 1 to 12 (and any such other
mirror/redirect/alphanumeric website, which appears to be associated
with any of the defendants‟ websites based on its name, branding or the
identity of its operator, or discovered to provide additional means of
accessing the defendants‟ Websites, and other domains/domain along
with their subdomains and subdirectories, owners/website
operators/entities, which are discovered to have been engaging in
infringing the plaintiffs‟ exclusive rights), their owners, partners,
proprietors, officers, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of
principals or agents, acting for and on their behalf, or anyone claiming
through, by or under them are hereby restrained, from, in any manner
hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available to the
public and/or communicating to the public, or facilitating the same, on
their websites, through the internet in any manner whatsoever, any
cinematograph work/content/programme/show in relation to which
plaintiffs have a Copyright.
26. The defendants no. 13 to 21 shall ensure compliance with this order
by blocking websites of the defendants no. 1 to 12, their URLs and the
respective IP addresses as filed along with the suit (Page 21-24 - Vol 1 of
the plaintiffs‟ documents and also Annexed herewith as Annexure -A).
27. The defendants no. 22 and 23 are further directed to take immediate
steps and issue requisite notifications within five working days, calling
upon various internet and telecom service providers registered under
them to block the aforementioned websites identified by the plaintiffs.
28. Further, as held by this court in UTV Software Communication Ltd.
(supra), in order for this court to be freed from constant monitoring and
adjudicating the issues of mirror/redirect/alphanumeric websites, it is
directed that as and when the plaintiffs file an application under Order I
Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for impleadment of
such websites, the plaintiffs shall file an affidavit confirming that the
newly impleaded website is mirror/redirect/alphanumeric website, which
appears to be associated with any of the defendants‟ websites based on
its name, branding or the identity of its operator, or has been discovered
to provide additional means of accessing the defendants‟ websites and
other domains/domain along with their subdomains and subdirectories,
owners/website operators/entities, which are discovered to have been
engaging in infringing the plaintiffs‟ exclusive rights, with sufficient
supporting evidence. Such applications shall be listed before the Joint
Registrar, who on being satisfied with the material placed on record,
shall issue appropriate directions to the ISPs.”
7. Pursuant to the liberty granted in paragraph 28 of the order dated
12.12.2022, the plaintiffs identified further websites which were found to be
mirror/redirect/alphanumeric variations of, or otherwise related to, defendant
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
nos. 1 to 12. The plaintiffs accordingly filed eight applications under Order I
Rule 10 CPC, each supported by an affidavit, seeking impleadment of the
said websites. The applications were allowed by the Joint Registrar, the
websites were impleaded as defendant nos. 25 to 87, and the interim
injunction was extended to them. The details are as under:
Defendant
S. No.
Impleadment
Date of Filing Date of Order
Application
Nos.
1. 25-27 I.A. 3770/2023 22.02.2023 27.02.2023
2. 28-36 I.A. 9775/2023 17.05.2023 19.05.2023
3. 37 I.A. 10266/2023 22.03.2023 24.05.2023
4. 38-42 I.A. 18584/2023 21.09.2023 22.09.2023
5. 43-54 I.A. 8306/2024 05.04.2024 15.04.2024
6. 55-66 I.A. 46969/2024 29.11.2024 03.12.2024
7. 67-79 I.A. 9373/2025 07.04.2025 09.04.2025
8. 80-87 I.A. 18511/2025 29.07.2025 01.08.2025
8. No written statement has been filed on behalf of any of the defendant
websites. Their right to file written statement has been closed vide orders
dated 18.07.2023, 17.11.2023, 15.04.2024, 07.11.2024, 16.07.2025 and
22.01.2026. Vide order dated 22.01.2026, the Joint Registrar recorded that
none of the defendant websites, i.e., defendant nos. 1 to 12 and 25 to 87, had
filed a written statement within the maximum permissible period, and that
the pleadings stood complete. Defendant nos. 18, 20, 21, 22 and 23 have
entered appearance, but have neither filed a written statement nor raised any
objection to the reliefs sought against them. The plaintiffs are not seeking
any substantive relief against the ISPs (defendant nos. 13 to 21) or against
DoT and MeitY (defendant nos. 22 and 23), who have been arrayed only to
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
ensure compliance with the orders passed by the Court. The plaintiffs are
also not pressing the relief of damages and costs.
9. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the present case is fit
for disposal by way of summary judgment. It is submitted that all the
defendants have been duly served, and the defendant websites have chosen
not to contest the suit. The plaintiffs have pleaded the factors laid down in
1
paragraph 59 of UTV Software Communication Ltd. v. 1337X.to in respect
of defendant nos. 1 to 12 in paragraphs 26 to 39 of the plaint, and the
infringing activities of defendant nos. 25 to 87 have been set out in the
respective impleadment applications.
10. None of the defendant websites has challenged the interim order or
placed any defence on record. Insofar as defendant nos. 13 to 23 are
concerned, the relief claimed is only consequential, so that the injunction is
not frustrated. It is further submitted that issues have not yet been framed,
and in the absence of any challenge to the factual averments in the plaint,
and in view of Order VIII Rule 5 CPC, no useful purpose would be served
by relegating the matter to trial.
11. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that the plaintiffs, under
almost similar circumstances and in respect of almost similar content, had
approached this Court in Universal City Studios LLC & Ors. v.
2
123movieshub.tc & Ors. , and the Court, vide judgment dated 07.10.2026,
summarily decreed the suit.
12. Besides the aforesaid, it is brought to the notice of the Court that the
plaintiffs had previously instituted several suits before this Court against
1
2019 SCC OnLine Del 8002.
2
2026:DHC:9399.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
similarly placed rogue websites, and the Court, on due consideration,
granted final decrees in favour of the plaintiffs. In those cases as well, no
trial was necessitated. Some of the decisions so referred are tabulated as
under:
S.No. Suit and Event Nature of
Nature of
Relevant
Paragraph (s)
1. Universal City Studios
LLC & Ors v
123movieshub.tc & Ors
CS(COMM) 116/2022
Event: Cinematograph
films
Disposal
Order
Summary
Judgement
dated
Dynamic
Injunction
33, 34
2. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://tamilrockers.ws &
Ors. CS(COMM) 369 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
26, 28
3. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
http://www2.series9.io &
Ors. CS(COMM) 400 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
25, 26, 28
4. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
http://www.onlinewatchm
ovies.com.pk/ & Ors.
CS(COMM) 403 of 2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
28, 30
5. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://ww2.movierulzfree.
com & Ors. CS(COMM)
407 of 2019 Event:
Cinematograph films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
27, 29
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
6. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://xmovies08.ru &
Ors. CS(COMM) 422 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
27, 29
7. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
Moviesflix.net & Ors.
CS(COMM) 457 of 2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
10.10.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
27, 29
8. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://Hindilinks4u.to and
Ors. CS(COMM) 366 of
2019
Event: Cinematographic
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
08.09.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
27
9. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
Https://www.Uwatchfree.s
t & Ors. CS (COMM) 402
of 2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
08.09.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
27, 29
10. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://skymovies.live &
Ors. CS(COMM) 409 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
08.09.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
26, 28
11. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://yomovies.com &
Ors. CS(COMM) 418 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
Summary
Judgment
dated
08.09.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
24, 26
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
films
12. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
rutracker.org & Ors. CS
(COMM) 515 of 2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
08.09.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
25, 27
13. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://Otorrents.com &
Ors. CS(COMM) 367 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
01.06.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
24-26
14. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://www2.filmlinks4u.i
s & Ors. CS(COMM) 368
of 2019 Event:
Cinematograph films
Summary
Judgment
dated
01.06.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
24-26
15. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
http://mp4moviez.io &
Ors. CS(COMM) 399 of
2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
01.06.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
25, 27
16. Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc. v.
https://www.tamilrockerm
ovies.com & Ors.
CS(COMM) 419 of 2019
Event: Cinematograph
films
Summary
Judgment
dated
01.06.2022
Dynamic
Injunction
25, 27
13. Order XIIIA CPC, as applicable to commercial disputes of a specified
value, was introduced by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Act 4 of 2016).
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
Rules 1 to 3 thereof read as under:
“1. Scope of and classes of suits to which this Order applies.-(1) This Order
sets out the procedure by which Courts may decide a claim pertaining to any
Commercial Dispute without recording oral evidence.
(2) For the purposes of this Order, the word “claim” shall include-
(a) part of a claim;
(b) any particular question on which the claim (whether in whole or in part)
depends; or
(c) a counterclaim, as the case may be.
(3) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, an application for summary
judgment under this Order shall not be made in a suit in respect of any
Commercial Dispute that is originally filed as a summary suit under Order
XXXVII.
2. Stage for application for summary judgment. An applicant may apply for
summary judgment at any time after summons has been served on the
defendant:
Provided that, no application for summary judgment may be made by such
applicant after the Court has framed the issues in respect of the suit.
3. Grounds for summary judgment.- The Court may give a summary judgment
against a plaintiff or defendant on a claim if it considers that--
(a) the plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding on the claim or the
defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim, as the
case may be; and
(b) there is no other compelling reason why the claim should not be disposed
of before recording of oral evidence.”
14. Order XIII Rule 2 permits an applicant to apply for summary
judgment at any time after summons has been served on the defendant, but
not after the Court has framed issues. Rule 4 sets out what the application
must contain, namely, a statement that it is made under Order XIIIA, a
disclosure of the material facts, the documents relied upon, the reasons why
the opposite party has no real prospect of succeeding, and the relief sought.
A Division Bench of this Court in Bright Enterprises Private Ltd. v. MJ
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
3
Bizcraft LLP , held as under:
“21. ... Even if we were to accept, which we do not, the argument of the
respondents that the Court had suo moto powers to deliver summary
judgment without there being any application, those powers also would have
to be exercised during this window, that is, after service of summons on the
defendant and prior to framing of issues. In addition to this, we also reiterate
that, in our view, a summary judgment under Order XIIIA CPC is not
permissible without there being an appropriate application for summary
judgment. ...
xxx xxx xxx
23. From the provisions laid out in Order XIIIA, it is evident that the
proceedings before Court are adversarial in nature and not inquisitorial. It
follows, therefore, that summary judgment under Order XIIIA cannot be
rendered in the absence of an adversary and merely upon the inquisition by
the Court. The Court is never an adversary in a dispute between parties. ...”
15. In the present case, summons has been duly served on all the
defendants, and issues have not been framed. The application is, therefore,
within the window contemplated under Rule 2. The application expressly
states that it is made under Order XIIIA CPC, refers to the pleadings and
documents on record, sets out why the defendant websites have no real
prospect of successfully defending the claim, and specifies the reliefs
sought. It thus meets the requirements of Rule 4. The concern that weighed
with the Division Bench in Bright Enterprises (supra) does not arise, since
there is a specific application on record, and the defendants have had notice
of the claim against them for a considerable period, during which the interim
injunction has remained in operation.
16. Coming to the second question, the Court finds that the defendant
websites are operated by anonymous entities that, do not enter appearance
before the Court. The averments made in the plaint are duly supported by
3
2017 SCC OnLine Del 6394.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
the affidavit of the investigator and the documentary evidence already
placed on record.
17. Clause (b) of Rule 3 of Order XIIIA CPC requires the Court to
consider whether there is any other compelling reason why the claim should
not be disposed of before recording oral evidence. Order VIII Rule 5(2) CPC
further provides that where the defendant has not filed a pleading, it shall be
lawful for the Court to pronounce judgment on the basis of the facts
contained in the plaint, except as against a person under a disability, though
the Court may, in its discretion, require any such fact to be proved. In
4
Disney Enterprises Inc. v. Balraj Muttneja , this Court observed as under:
“5. The plaintiffs, despite having been granted sufficient time and several
opportunities, have failed to get their affidavits for leading ex parte evidence
on record. However, it is not deemed expedient to further await the same and
allow this matter to languish, for the reason that I have in Indian Performing
Rights Society Ltd. Vs. Gauhati Town Club MANU/DE/0582/2013 held that
where the defendant is ex parte and the material before the Court is sufficient
to allow the claim of the plaintiff, the time of the Court should not be wasted
in directing ex parte evidence to be recorded and which mostly is nothing but
a repetition of the contents of the plaint.”
18. Similarly, in Hero Electric Vehicles Private Limited v. Nitish
5
Kumar , where the defendants had not appeared despite service, it was held
as under:
“19. ... Predicated on the fact that in the present case, neither defendant nos.1
and 2 entered appearance despite service nor did they file their written
statement and were consequently proceeded ex-parte, no purpose would be
served requiring the plaintiff to adduce any formal evidence in the present
suit. Moreover, under the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015
read with Rules 14 and 27 of the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property
Rights Division Rules, 2022 (IPD Rules) and Rule 1 in Chapter VII of the
Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as
„Original Side Rules, 2018‟), this Court can proceed to pass orders in the
absence of the defendants or their defence, as the defendants are noted to
4
2014:DHC:964.
5
CS(COMM) 104/2022, decided on 04.02.2026.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
have been served and the plaintiffs have also made out their case. ...”
6
19. In Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. v. https://tamilrockers.ws ,
which arose on identical pleadings and sought identical reliefs, this Court
held as under:
“24. Since the defendant nos. 1 to 16 and 51 to 237 are not appearing, despite
notice, in my opinion, the suit can be heard and decided summarily. The
defendant nos. 1 to 16 and 51 to 237 have no real prospect of successfully
defending the claim of copyright infringement and have further not chosen to
contest the said claim. The present matter is mainly concerned with the
enforcement of the injunction orders, which are passed against the rogue
websites who do not have any defence to the claim of copyright infringement,
but use the anonymity offered by the internet to engage in illegal activities,
such as copyright infringement in the present case. This is a fit case for
passing a Summary Judgment invoking the provisions of Order XIII-A of the
CPC, as applicable to the commercial disputes, read with Rule 27 of the
Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022.”
20. In these circumstances, requiring the plaintiffs to file an affidavit by
way of evidence would serve no additional purpose, as the same would
merely reiterate the averments and the material already on record. Therefore,
there is no compelling reason to require the plaintiffs to lead further
evidence or to subject the present suit to trial.
21. What remains to be seen is whether, on the material on record, the
defendant websites have any real prospect of successfully defending the
claim. This Court in UTV Software (supra) was dealing with a similar
controversy. In paragraph 1 of the said judgment, the following legal issues
were framed for adjudication:
“1. It is rare that in an ex-parte matter questions of law of general public
importance arise for consideration. However, in the present batch of ex-parte
matters the following seminal issues arise for consideration:-
(A) Whether an infringer of copyright on the internet is to be treated
differently from an infringer in the physical world?
6
2022/DHC/004171.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
(B) Whether seeking blocking of a website dedicated to piracy makes one an
opponent of a free and open internet?
(C) What is a „Rogue Website‟?
(D) Whether the test for determining a „Rogue Website‟ is a qualitative or a
quantitative one?
(E) Whether the defendant-websites fall in the category of „Rogue Websites‟?
(F) Whether this Court would be justified to pass directions to block the
„Rogue Websites‟ in their entirety?
(G) How should the Court deal with the „hydra headed‟ „Rogue Websites‟
who on being blocked, actually multiply and resurface as redirect or mirror
or alphanumeric websites?”
22. The Court in paragraphs 57 to 60 of UTV Software (supra) has
considered what are rogue websites. In paragraph 59, the following test has
been laid down to ascertain whether the website complained of is a
Flagrantly Infringing Online Location (FIOL)/Rogue Website. Paragraphs
59 and 60 are extracted as under:
“59. In the opinion of this Court, some of the factors to be considered for
determining whether the Website complained of is a FIOL/Rogue Website
are: (a) whether the primary purpose of the website is to commit or facilitate
copyright infringement;
(b) the flagrancy of the infringement, or the flagrancy of the facilitation of the
infringement; (c) Whether the detail of the registrant is masked and no
personal or traceable detail is available either of the Registrant or of the
user.
(d) Whether there is silence or inaction by such website after receipt of take
down notices pertaining to copyright infringement.
(e) Whether the online location makes available or contains Directories,
indexes or categories of the means to infringe, or facilitate an infringement of,
copyright;
(f) Whether the owner or operator of the online location demonstrates a
disregard for copyright generally; (g) Whether access to the online location
has been disabled by orders from any court of another country or territory on
the ground of or related to copyright infringement;
(h) whether the website contains guides or instructions to circumvent
measures, or any order of any court, that disables access to the website on the
ground of or related to copyright infringement; and (i) the volume of traffic at
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
or frequency of access to the website; (j) Any other relevant matter.
60. This Court clarifies that the aforementioned factors are illustrative and
not exhaustive and do not apply to intermediaries as they are governed by IT
Act, having statutory immunity and function in a wholly different manner.”
23. The Court further emphasised that website blocking in the case of
rogue websites strikes a balance between preserving the benefits of a free
and open internet and efforts to stop crimes such as digital piracy.
Paragraphs 86 and 87 read as under:
“86. Consequently, website blocking in the case of rogue websites, like the
defendant-websites, strikes a balance between preserving the benefits of a
free and open Internet and efforts to stop crimes such as digital piracy.
87. This Court is also of the opinion that it has the power to order ISPs and
the DoT as well as MEITY to take measures to stop current infringements as
well as if justified by the circumstances prevent future ones.”
24. In the present case, the plaintiffs have specifically pleaded the factors
laid down in paragraph 59 of UTV Software (supra) in respect of defendant
nos. 1 to 12 in paragraphs 26 to 39 of the plaint. The infringing activities of
defendant nos. 25 to 87 have been set out in the respective impleadment
applications. Each of those applications was supported by an affidavit
confirming that the website is a mirror/redirect/alphanumeric variation of, or
is related to, defendant nos. 1 to 12. These averments, supported by the
affidavit of the investigator and the documents on record, stand
uncontroverted. None of the defendant websites has challenged the interim
order dated 12.12.2022 or the subsequent orders extending it.
25. Applying the test laid down in UTV Software (supra), and
considering the documents filed and the averments made in the plaint and
the impleadment applications, this Court holds that defendant nos. 1 to 12
and 25 to 87 are rogue websites whose primary purpose is to commit and
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
facilitate infringement of the plaintiffs‟ copyright. They have no real
prospect of successfully defending the claim of infringement under Section
51 of the Act.
26. The relief sought against defendant nos. 13 to 23 is only
consequential, to ensure that the injunction is effectively implemented. Both
limbs of Rule 3 of Order XIIIA CPC are, therefore, satisfied, and the second
question is answered in favour of the plaintiffs.
27. In view of the above, the application is allowed. The suit is decreed in
terms of prayers (i) to (iv) of the plaint, which are extracted hereunder, with
the clarification that the reference to “Defendant Nos. 1-12” therein shall be
read as “Defendant Nos. 1-12 and 25-87”:
“i. Issue an order and decree of permanent injunction restraining the
Defendant Nos. 1-12 (and any such other mirror/redirect/alphanumeric
website which appears to be associated with any of the Defendant
Websites based on its name, branding or the identity of its operator, or
discovered to provide additional means of accessing, the Defendant
Websites, and other domains/domain along with their subdomains and
subdirectories, owners/website operators/entities which are discovered to
have been engaging in infringing the Plaintiffs‟ exclusive rights), its
owners, partners, proprietors, officers, servants, employees, and all others
in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on their behalf, or anyone
claiming through, by or under it, from, in any manner hosting, streaming,
reproducing, distributing, making available to the public and/or
communicating to the public, or facilitating the same, on their websites,
through the internet in any manner whatsoever, any cinematograph
work/content/programme/show in relation to which Plaintiffs have
copyright,
ii. Issue an order and decree directing the Defendant Nos. 13-21, their
directors, partners, proprietors, officers, affiliates, servants, employees,
and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on their
behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, to block access to the
Defendant Nos. 1-12 websites identified by the Plaintiffs in the instant suit
(and any such other mirror/redirect/alphanumeric website which appears
to be associated with any of the Defendant Websites based on its name,
branding or the identity of its operator, or discovered to provide
additional means of accessing, the Defendant Website, and other
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV
domains/domain along with their subdomains and subdirectories,
owners/website operators/entities which are discovered to have been
engaging in infringing the Plaintiffs‟ exclusive rights),
iii. Issue an order directing the Defendant Nos. 22 and 23, to issue a
notification calling upon the various internet and telecom service
providers registered under it to block access to the Defendant Nos. 1-12
websites identified by the Plaintiffs in the instant suit (and any such other
mirror/redirect/alphanumeric website which appears to be associated with
any of the Defendant Websites based on its name, branding or the identity
of its operator, or discovered to provide additional means of accessing,
the Defendant Websites, and other domains/domain along with their
subdomains and subdirectories, owners/website operators/entities which
are discovered to have been engaging in infringing the Plaintiffs‟
exclusive rights);
iv. Issue an order directing the Domain Name Registrars of the Defendant
Websites identified by the Plaintiffs in the Plaint to disclose the contact
details and other details about the owner of the said websites, and other
such relief as this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper;”
28. Liberty is reserved in favour of the plaintiffs, in terms of paragraph
107 of UTV Software (supra), to implead any mirror/redirect/alphanumeric
websites which merely provide new means of accessing the injuncted
websites, by filing an appropriate application.
29. Let the decree sheet be drawn up accordingly.
30. Application stands disposed of.
CS(COMM) 851/2022
1. In view of the order passed in I.A. 29890/2026, the suit stands
disposed of.
2. The earlier date fixed, i.e., 05.11.2026, stands cancelled.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
OCTOBER 30, 2026/P
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:03.11.2026
16:52:43
Signature Not Verified
Signed
By:PURUSHAINDRA
KUMAR KAURAV