Dismissed

M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd. v. M/S. Ushakiron Movies

Madras HC1 Jul 2021CS/103/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a suit and closed a connected original application. The applicant sought a declaration of copyright ownership and injunction against the film producers, but the claim failed because the plaintiff lacked rights via the original producer due to a prior assignment.

What did the court decide?

The suit for declaration of copyright and permanent injunction was dismissed. The original application was closed.

M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd. Vs M/S. Ushakiron Movies — Intellectual Property | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2021

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

C.S. No.103 of 2014 and O.A.No. 130 of 2014

¶7

M/s.Sun TV Network Ltd. Rep by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.M.Jothi Basu, Murasoli Maran Towers, 73 MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai – 28.

¶8

...Plaintiff / Applicant

¶9

.Vs.

¶10

1.M/s.Ushakiron Movies Represented by its Proprietor, Sri Ramoji Rao, Ramoji Film City, Anajpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Renga Reddy District, Andhra Pradesh – 501 512.

¶11

2.ETV Network, A Unit of M/s.Ushodhaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Proprietor Sri Ramoji Rao, Ramoji Film City, Anajpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Renga Reddy District, Andhra Pradesh – 501 512.

¶12

3.M/s.Sree Lakshmi Prasanna Pictures, Represented by its Proprietor,

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Mohan Babu, No.6, Film Nagar,

¶14

¶15

Hyderabad – 500 034. ... Defendants / Respondents

¶16

Civil suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pray for Judgment and Decree against the Defendants:

¶17

a) Declaration that the plaintiff is the sole and exclusive copyright holder of Schedule Mentioned Telugu Motion Colour Pictures for broadcasting the said films through any Satellite System (India or Foreign), World Satellite Rights, Satellite broadcasting Service, Satellite Television Broadcasting Service, satellite Radio Broadcasting, Public Service Broadcasting, Private Communication/ Broadcast, Terrestrial broadcasting service, Terrestrial Digital Service/ broadcasting, Cable Television Service, Cable Television Service, Station Doordarshan, Direct to Home Service, Airborne Rights, Seaborne Rights, Pay TV Rights, VCD, DVD, internet, Audio, Video, local delivery service, MMDS, cable, wire, wireless or any other systems or media without restriction of geographical area;

¶18

¶19

Service Broadcasting, Private Communication/ Broadcast, Terrestrial

¶20

¶21

broadcasting Service, Terrestrial Digital Service/ broadcasting, Cable

¶22

Television Service, Station Doordarshan, Direct to Home Service, Airborne Rights, Seaborne Rights, Pay TV Rights, VCD, DVD, internet, Audio, Video, local delivery service, MMDS, cable, wire, wireless or any other systems or media without restriction of geographical area and

¶23

c) to pay cost.

¶24

O.A.No. 130 of 2014:-

¶25

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to restrain 1^st and 2^nd respondents / Defendants, their men, representatives, agents and anybody on behalf of the respondents / defendants from in anyway exhibiting or exploiting the Schedule Mentioned Telugu Motion Colour Pictures through any Satellite System (India or Foreign), World Satellite Rights, Satellite broadcasting Service, Satellite Television Broadcasting Service, Satellite Radio Broadcasting, Public Service Broadcasting, Private Communication/ Broadcast, Terrestrial broadcasting Service, Terrestrial Digital Service/ broadcasting, Cable Television Service, Station Doordarshan, Direct to Home Service, Airborne Rights, Seaborne Rights, Pay TV Rights, VCD, DVD, internet, Audio, Video, local delivery service, MMDS, cable, wire, wireless or any other systems or media without https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ restriction of geographical area by an order of pending disposal of the

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

¶28

above suit.

¶29

This suit along with the Original application coming on this day before this Court for hearing in the presence of Mrs.M.Sneha for Mr.B.K.Girish Neelakantan, Advocate for the plaintiff in C.S.No. 103 of 2014 and for the applicant in O.A.No. 130 of 2014 and Mr.N.Nithianandam, Advocate for the Defendants 1 and 2 in C.S.No. 103 of 2014 and for the respondents 1 and 2 in O.A.No. 130 of 2014 and Mr.K.Ravindranath, Advocate for the 3^rd Defendant in C.S.No. 103 of 2014 and for the 3^rd respondent in O.A.No. 130 of 2014 and upon reading the plaint filed in C.S.No. 103 of 2014 and the order dated 13/03/2014 made in O.A.No. 130 of 2014 and this Court having observed that the prohibition or the limitation contained under Sub-Section 5 of Section 19 will not apply to the assignment made by the 3^rd defendant to the 1^st defendant on 22.12.1993. therefore, the second assignment by the 3^rd defendant in favour of the plaintiff will not give right to the plaintiff to claim copyrights over the movies in question, it is ordered as follows:-

¶30

That the suit in C.S.No. 103 of 2014, be and is hereby dismissed under rule 3(a) of order XIII–A of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

¶31

That this dismissal shall not however affect the rights of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ plaintiff that shall be available to the plaintiff as against the 3^rd defendant /

¶32

¶33

Producer of the movies.

¶34

That the O.A.No. 130 of 2014 do stand closed.

¶35

WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JULY 2021.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Comm. Cases) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶38

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶39

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶40

¶41

EVK 14/07/2021

¶42

C.S. No.103 of 2014 and O.A.No. 130 of 2014

¶43

ORDER

¶44

DATED : 01.07.2021

¶45

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBRAMANIAN

¶46

FOR APPROVAL: 19/04/2021

¶47

APPROVED ON: 20/07/2021

¶48

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶49

¶50

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶51

DATED : 01.07.2021

¶52

CORAM

¶53

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶54

C.S.No.103 of 2014 and

¶55

O.A.No.130 of 2014

¶56

M/s.Sun TV Network Ltd. Rep by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.M.Jothi Basu, Murasoli Maran Towers, 73 MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai – 28.

¶57

...Plaintiff

¶58

.Vs.

¶59

1.M/s.Ushakiron Movies Represented by its Proprietor, Sri Ramoji Rao, Ramoji Film City, Anajpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Renga Reddy District, Andhra Pradesh – 501 512.

¶60

2.ETV Network, A Unit of M/s.Ushodhaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Sri Ramoji Rao, Ramoji Film City, Anajpur Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Renga Reddy District, Andhra Pradesh – 501 512.

¶61

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.M/s.Sree Lakshmi Prasanna Pictures,

¶62

Represented by its Proprietor,

... Defendants

Mohan Babu,

No.6, Film Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 034.

¶67

Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Section 55 and 62 of the Copy Rights Act and Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for a judgment and decree for:

¶68

a) Declaration that the plaintiff is the sole and exclusive copyright holder of Schedule Mentioned Telugu Motion Colour Pictures for broadcasting the said films through any Satellite System (India or Foreign), World Satellite Rights, Satellite broadcasting Service, Satellite Television Broadcasting Service, satellite Radio Broadcasting, Public Service Broadcasting, Private Communication/ Broadcast, Cable Television Service, Terrestrial Digital Service/ broadcasting, Cable Television Service, Station Doordarshan, Direct to Home Service, Airborne Rights, Seaborne Rights, Pay TV Rights, VCD, DVD, internet, Audio, Video, local delivery service, MMDS, cable, wire, wireless or any other systems or media without restriction of geographical area;

¶69

b) Consequential permanent injunction restraining 1^st and 2^nd defendants, their men, representatives, agents and anybody on behalf of the defendants from in anyway exhibiting or exploiting the Schedule Mentioned Telugu Motion Colour Pictures through any Satellite System (India or Foreign), World Satellite Rights, Satellite broadcasting Service, Satellite Television Broadcasting Service, Satellite Radio Broadcasting, Public Service Broadcasting, Private Communication/ Broadcast, Terrestrial broadcasting Service, Terrestrial Digital Service/ broadcasting, Cable Television Service, Station Doordarshan, Direct to Home Service, Airborne https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Rights, Seaborne Rights, Pay TV Rights, VCD, DVD, internet, Audio,

¶70

Video, local delivery service, MMDS, cable, wire, wireless or any other

¶71

¶72

systems or media without restriction of geographical area and

¶73

c) for costs of the suit.

¶74

For Plaintiff : Mrs.M.Sneha for Mr.B.K.Girish Neelakantan For Defendants : Mr.N.Nithianandam for D1 and D2 Mr.K.Ravindranath for D3 ********

¶75

J U D G M E N T

¶76

The plaintiff claims copyright to the suit movies under the assignment

¶77

dated 20.12.2003.

¶78

2. The claim of the plaintiff is opposed by the 1^st defendant on the ground that the 3^rd defendant who is the Producer of the Movies had assigned the rights to the 1^st defendant even on 22.12.1993 and therefore the

¶79

3^rd defendant did not have any right to assign the movies again on 20.12.2003.

¶80

3. Even in the plaint, the plaintiff would plead that in view of Section 19(5) of the Copyright Act, 1957, the assignment would be valid only for a period of 5 years, since the Deed of Assignment executed by the 3^rd defendant in favour of the 1^st defendant does not specify a specific period of assignment.

¶81

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. It is now brought to my notice that Sub-Section 5 of Section 19 of

¶82

¶83

the Copyright Act, 1957 was introduced by way of an amendment by Act 38

¶84

of 1994 with effect from 10.05.1995. Sub-Section 7 of Section 19 makes it

¶85

clear that nothing contained under Sub-Section 5 shall apply to assignments made before the coming into force of the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 1994.

¶86

5. It is therefore clear that the prohibition or the limitation contained under Sub-Section 5 of Section 19 will not apply to the assignment made by the 3^rd defendant to the 1^st defendant on 22.12.1993. Therefore, the second assignment by the 3^rd defendant in favour of the plaintiff will not give right to the plaintiff to claim copyrights over the movies in question.

¶87

6. Hence, the suit fails and it is dismissed under Rule 3(a) of order XIII A of the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. This dismissal will not however affect the rights of the plaintiff that may be available to the plaintiff as against the 3^rd defendant/ Producer of the movies. In view of the dismissal of the suit, the connected Original Application is closed.

¶88

Sd./-R.S.M.J.

¶89

01/07/2021

¶90

//Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶91

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶92

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶93

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶94

¶95

List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff : Nil List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil

¶96

List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil

¶97

Sd./-R.S.M.J. 01/07/2021 //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶98

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶99

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶100

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd. v. M/S. Ushakiron Movies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Sun Tv Network Ltd. v. M/S. Ushakiron Movies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Gupta Enterprises Vs M/s. United India Insurance

M/S Apollo Meters Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.Nutan Valve (India)

Thamizhnadu Brahmin Associatio Vs Thamizhnadu Brahmin Associatio

Tamil Nadu Table Tennis Association Vs Table Tennis Federation of India(Ttfi)

Hitesh Jabak Vs Kishendas Chabra & Co.

The Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Presently, The Deputy Commissioner of GST Vs The Official Liquidator