Civil suit filed by Eros International Media Limited against multiple telecom and media entities for copyright infringement of the film 'Manmarziyaan'. The plaintiff withdrew the suit via written instructions on 09.11.2018.
Suit dismissed as withdrawn. No refund of court fees. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 09.11.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
C.S.No.643 of 2018
and
O.A.Nos.864 and 865 of 2018
Eros International Media Limited
Gee Gee Universal, 2 nd Floor, Bearing Door NO.2,
Old No.16, 18/1&2 (Old No.8),
MC Nichols Road,
Chetpet,
Chennai – 600 031
represented by its Authorised Signatory
Mr.Arun Kumar .. Plaintiff
Vs.
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,
Harish Chandra Mathur Lane,
Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd
5 th Floor, Mahanagar Doorsanchar Sadan,
9, CGO Complex Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003
3. Bharti Airtel Limited
Bharti Crescent, 1, Nelson Mandela Road,
Vasant Kunj, Phase II,
New Delhi 110 070
4. Aircel Cellular Limited,
5th floor, Spencer Plaza,
769 Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600002.
2
3
4
5
222, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021, India
6
No.16, No.1A Kalpana Appartments, 1st Street, Above Padmanaba Nagar Electricity Board Adyar, Chennai – 600 020.
42.Thiru Nagar Satellite Vision Pvt Ltd,
No. 149/80 Vijaya Theatre Complex, Behind Kasi Theatre Pillayar Koil Street, Jaffer Khanpet, Chennai – 600 083. .. Defendants
This Civil Suit is preferred, under Order VII Rule – 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and Order IV Rule 1 of O.S Rules, 1956 Read with Sections 51,52,55 and 62 The Copyright Act, 1957 and The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 and Section 7 of The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, No 4 of 2016 – Suit for Permanent Injunction for the Infringement of Copyright; for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 37 from infringing the cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” and said work be directed to block all websites/web pages including websites mentioned in Schedule-A hosting contents that relate to Plaintiff's copyright protected cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” in any manner, thereby restraining the unauthorised copying, transmission, communication or make available or display or release or show or upload or download or exhibit or play and/or in any manner communicate in and/or through their services immediate of receipt of details of such infringing websites/webpages in writing; for a permanent http://www.judis.nic.in injunction restraining the Defendants 38-42 and any other person or entity infringing the cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” by themselves, their partners/proprietor/directors, heirs, representatives, successors in business, assigns, distributors, agents, servants or anyone claiming through
7
them or under them from infringing the Plaintiff's copyrighted cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” by copying, recording, reproducing or allowing camcording or allowing others to transmit, communicate or make available or distributing or duplicating or displaying or releasing or showing or uploading or downloading or exhibiting or playing and/or in any manner whatsoever from communicating the cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” and said work without a proper license from the plaintiff or in any other manner which would violate/infringe the Plaintiff's copyrighted cinematographic film “Manmarziyaan” through different mediums including but not limited to CD,DVD,Blu-ray disc, VCD, cable TV, Direct to home services, internet services, multimedia messaging services, pen drives, hard drives, tapes, DAS satellite, Conditional Access Systems or in any other medium/manner whatsoever; and for costs.
For Plaintiff : Mr. Arun C. Mohan
For Defendants : Ms.K.Parameshwari for D1
Mr.A.M.Venkatakrishnan for D10
Mr.R.Nithiyanandhan for D37 and D30
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for plaintiff submits that plaintiff has given
instructions for withdrawal of the suit. Saying so, learned counsel has made an endorsement in the suit file which reads as follows:
'Upon written instructions received from the plaintiff, we hereby withdraw the suit. The plaintiff does not insist on refund of court fees.
8
endorsement and submit that the plaintiff does not insisting on refund of
court fees.
reiteration of the same, this suit is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently,
all interlocutory applications are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
09.11 . 2018
Index : Yes/No
gpa/mp
9
M.SUNDAR, J.
gpa/mp
C.S.No.643 of 2018
and O.A.Nos.864 & 865 of 2018
09.11.2018
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd
Bharti Airtel Limited
Aircel Cellular Limited
Hathway cable & Datacom Limited
M.SUNDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
