Plaintiff's counsel withdrew the suit for permanent injunction regarding copyright infringement of the film Pad Man. The court dismissed the suit as withdrawn without costs.
Suit dismissed as withdrawn. No 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:12.03.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
C.S.No.90 of 2018
2
3
4
5
42 SND Satellite Vision New No.40/83/1 Muttiah Street Vellala Teynampet Chennai 86 ... Defendants
Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Ruels, 1956 read with Sections 51, 52, 55 and 62 of the Copy right Act, 1957 and the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 – suit for permanent injunction for the infringement of copyright seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 37 infringing the cinematographic film Pad Man and be directed to block all websites/web pages including websites mentioned in Schedule A hosting contents that relate to the copyright protected cinematographic Film Pad Man to which the plaintiff has the exclusive rights in any manner thereby restraining the authorised copying transmission communication or make available or display or release or show or upload or download or exhibit or play stream and/or in any manner communicate in and/or through their services immediately upon receipt of details of such infringing websites/webpages in writing in any manner whatsoever, for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 38 to 42 infringing the cinematographic film “Pad Man” by themselves, their partners/proprietor/directors, heirs, representatives, successors in business, assigns, distributors, agents, servants or anyone claiming through them or under them from infringing the plaintiff's copyrighted cinematographic film “Pad Man' 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 “Pad Man” without a proper license from the plaintiff or in any other manner which would violate / infringe the copyright of the cinematographic film “Pad Man” 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, staellite, Conditional Access Systems or in any other medium/manner whatsoever and for the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Ms.Durga V. Bhatt
JUDGMENT
Ms.Durga V. Bhatt, learned counsel on record for the plaintiff submits that she has written instructions from plaintiff to withdraw the
6
suit. Ms.Durga V Bhatt has made an endorsement in the suit file, which reads as follows:
“Upon written instructions from the plaintiff, I hereby withdraw the suit”
plaintiff and in the light of the endorsement made by her in the suit file
(which has been extracted/reproduced supra), this suit will stand dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
12.03.2018
gpa
7
M.SUNDAR, J.
gpa
C.S.No.90 of 2018
12.03.2018
M. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
