Disposed

R. Kishore Kumar v. Durairajan @ R.D. Ragan

Madras HC4 Jun 2024OSA(CAD)/111/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two original side appeals and two civil miscellaneous petitions related to a dispute over rival Censor Board certificates for a cinematograph film. The appeals were closed without the court expressing any opinion on the merits, leaving the main suit for the Commercial Division to decide.

What did the court decide?

OSAs and CMPs disposed of as closed/withdrawn without order as to costs; no expression of opinion on merits.

R. Kishore Kumar Vs Durairajan @ R.D. Ragan — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04.06.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

¶8

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023 &

¶9

C.M.P.Nos.19507 of 2023 in O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 of 2023 C.M.P.No. 19572 of 2023 in O.S.A (CAD) Nos.113 of 2023

¶10

Mr.R.Kishore Kumar Proprietor Annai Therasa International Films Any time Money Films both having office at No.6/36 Arunachalam Road Saligramam, Chennai – 600 093

¶11

... Appellant in both appeals Vs.

¶12

Durairajan @ R.D.Ragan

¶13

M/s.R.R.Cine Production Rep. By its Managing Partner Durairajan @ R.D.Ragan No.6, School 3^rd Street Virugambakkam Chennai – 600 092

¶14

Film & Television Producers Guild of South India Rep. By its Secretary

¶15

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

¶16

1/6

¶17

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶18

New No.19, Old No.5 Jagatheeswaran Street T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017

¶19

Tamil Film Producers Council Rep. By its Secretary South Indian Film Chambers Compound No.606, Anna Salai Chennai – 600 006

¶20

Central Board of Film Certification Regional Office, Shastri Bhavan 26, Haddows Road Chennai – 600 006

¶21

Qube

¶22

No.42, Ranga Road Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004

¶23

¶24

No.33/1, Walaja Road Chepauk, Chennai – 600 002

¶25

PXD Prasad Lab Arunachalam Road Saligramam Chennai – 600 093 .. Respondents

¶26

Original Side Appeals filed under Section 13 of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to set aside the order dated 13.06.2023 made in Application Nos.5922 and 5923 of 2022 in C.S.No.237 of 2022.

¶27

For Appellant : Mr.T.Thiageswaran of M/s.Waraon and Sairam (Law Firm) For Respondents : Mr.Krishna Ravindran for R1 Mr.C.Kulanthaivel Senior Panel Counsel for R5 No appearance for R2 to R4 and R6 to R8

¶28

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

¶29

2/6

¶30

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶31

COMMON JUDGMENT

¶32

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.Sundar, J. )

¶33

This common order will govern the captioned two 'Original

¶34

Side Appeals' ['OSAs' for the sake of brevity] and captioned two 'Civil Miscellaneous Petitions' ['CMPs' for the sake of brevity] thereat.

¶35

Both captioned OSAs are directed against interim orders made by Hon'ble Commercial Division. Suffice to say that the entire lis pertains to rival claim for one cinematograph film, which we are informed has been given Censor Board Certificate in two different titles showing one adversary in each certificate as the producer. We express no opinion on this as closure is being given to the captioned OSAs and the Commercial Division will now be deciding the main suit on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶36

Mr.T.Thiageswaran, learned cousnel of M/s.Waraon and Sairam (Law Firm) for appellant in both OSAs and Mr.Krishna Ravindran, learned counsel for both respondents are before us. Learned counsel for appellant has made endorsements in the case file and scanned reproduction of the same are as follows:

¶37

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

¶38

3/6

¶39

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶40

We appreciate the fair stand that it would be desirable to

¶41

have the matter decided in the main suit as the parties are evenly balanced nay delicately poised as both have injunctions against each other. We express no opinion on this aspect either.

¶42

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

¶43

4/6

¶44

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶45

In the light of the fair stand taken by counsel on both sides,

¶46

captioned OSAs and captioned CMPs are disposed of as closed. Though obvious, we make it clear that we have not expressed any view or opinion on the merits of the matter and that it is well settled that opinions expressed in interlocutory orders will have no bearing for deciding the main suit. For the purpose of abundant clarity and specificity, we make it clear that main suit will be decided untrammeled by the interlocutory proceedings and disposal/withdrawal of these intra-court appeals.

¶47

Captioned OSAs and CMPs are disposed of as closed / withdrawn in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

(M.S.J.) (K.G.T.J.) 04.06.2024 Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No gpa

¶49

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

¶50

5/6

¶51

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶52

M .SUNDAR.J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., gpa

¶53

O.S.A (CAD) Nos.111 and 113 of 2023

¶54

04.06.2024

¶55

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

¶56

6/6

R. Kishore Kumar v. Durairajan @ R.D. Ragan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Kishore Kumar v. Durairajan @ R.D. Ragan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Prakash Vs S.N.Media

The Chairperson Vs v. Manoharan

M/S.Neyveli Lignite Corporation Vs M/S.J.K.Fenner (India) Limited

M/s.Arogya Sukh Vs Hatsun Agro Product Ltd.

Ttk Prestige Ltd. Vs Butterfly Gandhimathi Appliances Ltd.

Narasus Saarathy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs Nepolean