Dismissed

Aalayam Productions, v. 1.M/S.FRIENDS India

Madras HC24 Jun 2021CS/755/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this suit filed in 2001 for copyright infringement and permanent injunction, the plaintiff's counsel could not contact the principal party.Seeing no prospect of receipt of instructions and no witnesses examined, the Court held keeping the suit pending would serve no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

The Plaintiff was granted liberty to take appropriate action if there is any violation in future. No costs awarded.

Aalayam Productions, Vs 1.M/S.FRIENDS India — Intellectual Property | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

C.S.No.755 of 2001

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.06.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

C.S.No.755 of 2001
Aalayam Productions
rep. by its Partner S.Sriram
No.3, First Cross Street,
Seethammal Colony
Chennai – 18 ...Plaintiff
.Vs.

¶7

1.M/s.Friends India rep. by its Prop.Jhamu U.Sughand No.3-C, Rajpipla Co.Op.Housing Society Ltd. 352, Linking Road, Santacruz (W) Mumbai – 400 054. 2.Amitabh Bachchan Corporation Ltd. Ajanta Complex, 8, Juhu Tara Road, Mumbai – 400 049.

¶8

3.Hathway Cable Datacom Private Ltd Swati Building, 6^th Floor Corner of North Avenue and Linking Road Santacruz (W) Mumbai – 400 054.

¶9

Page No.1/5

¶10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶11

C.S.No.755 of 2001

¶12

and having office at Chennai No.29, Luz Avenue, (Opp. To Nageswar Rao Park) Mylapore, Chennai – 4.

¶13

... Defendants

¶14

Plaint filed under Sections 55 and 62 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 read with Order IV Rule 1 of the High Court Original Side Rules praying for :

¶15

a) Permanent Injunction, restraining the defendants, their men, agents and servants from infringing the plaintiff's cable T.V., Satellite T.V and Terrestrial T.V. Copyrights in the Hindi feature film “BOMBAY” starring Aravind Swamy, Monisha Koirala and directed by Mani Rathnam and

¶16

b) direct the defendants to pay costs of the suit.

¶17

For Plaintiff : Mr.A.Umasankar For Defendants : No appearance

¶18

¶19

Page No.2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶20

C.S.No.755 of 2001

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking

¶23

a) Permanent Injunction, restraining the defendants, their men,

¶24

agents and servants from infringing the plaintiff's cable T.V., Satellite T.V and Terrestrial T.V. Copyrights in the Hindi feature film “BOMBAY” starring Aravind Swamy, Monisha Koirala and directed by

¶25

Mani Rathnam and

¶26

b) direct the defendants to pay costs of the suit.

¶27

2. Mr.Umashankar, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff

¶28

would submit that he is unable to contact the plaintiff. The letters sent by

¶29

his Office have been returned as not claimed.

¶30

3. The suit relates to the satellite rights of the movie “BOMBAY”.

¶31

The suit itself is of the year 2001 and the counsel on either side are unable to get instructions from the parties. No useful purpose will be served in keeping the suit pending.

¶32

Page No.3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶33

C.S.No.755 of 2001

¶34

4. Hence, the suit is dismissed under Rule 3(a) of Order XIII A of

¶35

the Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, reserving the liberty to the plaintiff to take appropriate action if

¶36

there is any violation in future. No costs.

¶37

24.06.2021
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-speaking order
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff : Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil

¶38

24.06.2021
dsa

¶39

Page No.4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶40

C.S.No.755 of 2001

¶41

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

dsa

C.S.No.755 of 2001

24.06.2021

Page No.5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Aalayam Productions, v. 1.M/S.FRIENDS India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aalayam Productions, v. 1.M/S.FRIENDS India

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

K.Nivedha Vs Dr..Radhakrishnan IAS

M/S Mysore Cements Ltd., Vs M/S D.M.Cements (P) Ltd.

Chaya Industries Ltd. Vs M/S Owners and Parties

P.C.Duraisamy and Another Vs M/S.Muthu Masala

M.v.R.S.Prasad Vs Manickam Narayanan

M.K.Harishankar, Vs 1.B.M.B.PRODUCTION