The High Court of Madras recalled the plaintiff's civil suit filed regarding copyright ownership. Upon counsel's submission that the suit was settled between parties, the Court dismissed the suit as withdrawn without any costs.
Suit dismissed as withdrawn without costs.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
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S. No.863 of 1999
In the matter of the Indian Copyright Act 1957 and
In the matter of the Limited Copyright in the picture "Vanmathi" and three other pictures.
Raj Television Network Ltd rep by Director M.Raveendran Registered Office at No. 12-B, Poes Road, 3rd Street, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018.
... Plaintiff
-Versus-
1.Mr. D.Pandian, Proprietor Messrs Sivasakthi Movie Makers 9/1 Wheat Crofts Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34.
2.Mr. G.Sathya 49, Vaidyanatha Mudali Street Chennai 1.
a Unit of Sumangali Publications Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director 268/269 Anna Salai https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Teynampet, Chennai 18.
... Defendants
2
C.S.No. 893 of 1999
Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a judgment and Decree:
(a) For a declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the limited copyright viz., the world satellite TV rights amongst other rights in the pictures described in the schedule hereunder;
(b) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their
men, agents, servants or any other person acting on their behalf from telecasting the pictures or interfering with the plaintiff's limited copyright in the pictures described in the schedule hereunder and
(c) For costs of the suit.
This civil suit coming on this day before this court for hearing in the presence of Ms.Monica Chopra for Mr.C.Ramesh, advocates for the plaintiff herein and of Mr.J.R.K.Bhavanantham advocate for the first Defendant herein and Mr.Y.Anil Kumar advocate for the 3rd Defendant herein and upon reading the plaint filed herein and the Learned Counsel for plaintiff having submitted that the suit has been settled between the parties and sought permission to withdraw the suit and this Court doth recording
the statement of the counsel and it is ordered as follow:-
3
dismissed as withdrawn.
WITNESS, THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Comm.Cases)
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
4
NS 22.10.2021
C.S.No. 863 of 1999
DECREE
DATED 25/08/2021
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
FOR APPROVAL: 29/12/2021
APPROVED ON: 10/01/2022
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.863 of 1999
Raj Television Network Ltd rep by Director M.Raveendran
...Plaintiff
.Vs.
a Unit of Sumangali Publications Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director 268/269 Anna Salai Teynampet, Chennai 18.
... Defendants
Plaint filed under Section 55 and 62 of the Indian Copyright Act read with Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying :
(a) For a declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the limited copyright viz., the world satellite TV rights amongst other rights in the pictures described in the schedule hereunder;
(b) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants or any other person acting on their behalf from https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ telecasting the pictures or interfering with the plaintiff's limited copyright in
6
the pictures described in the schedule hereunder and
(c) For costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Ms.Monica Chopra for Mr.C.Ramesh For Defendants : Mr.J.R.K.Bhavanantham for D1 Mr.Y.Anil Kumar for D3 ********
J U D G M E N T
Ms.Monica Chopra, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff
would submit that the suit has been settled between the parties and she seeks permission to withdraw the suit.
2. Recording the said statement of the counsel, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
Sd/- R.S.M.J. 25/08/2021
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
Sd/- R.S.M.J. 25/08/2021
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the suit filed regarding copyright ownership and injunction between the parties has been withdrawn by mutual settlement?
Whether the suit on withdrawal of the plaintiff be dismissed without costs?
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Mr. D. Pandian
Mr. G. Sathya
Messrs Sun TV
R. Subramanian
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
