Applause Entertainment Private Limited Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Applause Entertainment Private Limited Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether Defendants 1 to 36 should be permanently restrained from infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” by blocking all websites/web pages (including future, mirror/redirect and Schedule-A non-compliant sites) hosting content relating to the Show/Series. Posed by the prayer clause; never adjudicated as the suit was withdrawn. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

At the instance of the plaintiff, whose learned counsel sought permission to withdraw the suit and made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle, the suit was dismissed as withdrawn, with no costs.

Key takeaways

Consequent upon the dismissal of the suit as withdrawn, the connected applications (O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025) were closed.ratio¶82

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Commercial Division — C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 with connected O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025 (N. Senthilkumar, J.; decided 26.11.2025). Applause Entertainment Private Limited, as plaintiff, had filed a commercial suit under Order VII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 r/w Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, 1956, r/w Sections 51, 52, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 and Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act 2015 against 41 defendants — internet service providers and cable/broadband operators including Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., Bharti Airtel Limited and Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited — seeking (i) a permanent injunction against Defendants 1 to 36 directing them to block all websites/web pages (including future, mirror/redirect and Schedule-A non-compliant sites) hosting content relating to its Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE”, and (ii) a permanent injunction against Defendants 37 to 41 restraining infringement of the same Show/Series by copying, recording, reproduction, cam-cording, transmission, communication or distribution without licence. Before any adjudication, learned counsel for the plaintiff sought permission to withdraw the suit and made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle; the Court dismissed the suit as withdrawn, ordered no costs, and closed the connected applications. No precedent was cited and no issue was decided on the merits.

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

Applause Entertainment Private Limited ... Plaintiff

Versus

1.Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bharat Sanchar Bhavan, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001.

2.Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi 110 003.

3.Bharti Airtel Limited, New Delhi - 110 070.

4.Aircel Cellular Limited

5.Hathway Cable & Datacom Limited, Mumbai - 400 098.

1/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

6.Tata Communication Limited, Maharastra 400 001.

7.Idea Cellular Limited

8.Reliance Communications Infrastructure Limited

9.Tata Teleservices Ltd., New Delhi 110 001.

10.Syscon Infoway Pvt. Ltd.

11.GTPL Hathway Ltd., Ahmedabad - 380 004.

12.Tikona Digital Networks Private Limited, Mumbai - 400 078.

13.BG Broadband India Private Limited, Mumbai 400 059.

14.Sify Technologies Limited,

Chennai - 600 13.

15.Siti Broadband Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi North West.

16.You Broadband & Cable India Ltd., Surat - 395009.

17.Asianet Satellite Communications, Kerala - 695581.

2/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

18.Data Infosys Limited, Jaipur 302 018.

19.Readylink Internet Services Limited, Coimbatore – 641006.

20.Opto Network Private Limited

21.Nettlinx Limited, Hyderabad - 500004.

22.City Online Services Limited, Hyderabad - 500 038.

23.Pioneer eLabs Limited, Hyderabad 500 080.

24.AT&T Global Network Service India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi - 110 001.

25.Nextgen Communications Limited

26.Virgo Global Media Limited

27.Southern Online Bio Technologies Limited, Hyderabad - 500 004.

28.MyNet Services India Private Limited

29.Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited, Mumbai - 400 021.

3/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

30.Limras Eronet Broadband Services Private Limited,

Chennai - 600 010.

31.RS Broadband Service India Private Limited, Chennai 600 010.

32.Spectra ISP Networks Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon - 122 015.

33.Pulse Telesystems Private Limited

34.Essel Shyam Communications Ltd., New Delhi - 110 019 India.

35.Five Network Solution (I) Ltd., Mumbai 400 022, India.

36.Atria Convergence Technologies Limited, Chennai - 600 017.

37.Action Lane,

Chennai - 600 020.

38.Jak Communications Pvt. Ltd.,

Chennai - 600 102.

39.C32 Cable Net Pvt. Ltd.,

Chennai - 600 014.

40.Thamizhaga Cable TV Communication Pvt. Ltd., Chennai - 600 031.

4/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

41.Thiru Nagar Satellite Vision Pvt. Ltd. ... Defendants

Prayer: Commercial Suit filed under Order VII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, r/w Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules, 1956, r/w Sections 51, 52, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 and Section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act 2015 to grant a Judgement and Decree on the following terms:

a)A permanent injunction restraining the Defendants 1 to 36 from infringing the plaintiff’s copyright in the said Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” and be directed to block all websites/web pages and future websites (including their prefix and suffix) and those Non-Compliant websites mentioned in Schedule-A hosting contents that relate to Plaintiff’s copyright protected said Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” in any manner, thereby restraining the unauthorised copying, transmission, communication or make available or display or release or show or upload or download or exhibit or play and/or in any manner communicate in and/or through their services immediate of receipt of details of such infringing websites/webpages/mirror/redirect websites or alphanumeric websites in writing;

b)A permanent injunction restraining the Defendants 37 – 41 from infringing the plaintiff’s copyright in the said Show/Series “KILLING/ 5/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025 SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” 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 said Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” by copying, recording, reproducing or allowing cam-cording 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 said Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” without a proper license from the Plaintiff or in any other manner which would violate / infringe the Plaintiff's copyrighted said Show/Series “KILLING/ SEARCH – THE NAINA MURDER CASE” 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, satellite, Conditional Access Systems or in any other medium/manner whatsoever

c)for costs of the suit.

For Plaintiff : Mr.Srihari R.

6/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025 JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the plaintiff seeks permission of this Court to

withdraw this suit. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the

N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

vga

Court bundle. Accordingly, this suit is dismissed as withdrawn. N o costs.

Consequently, connected applications are closed.

26.11.2025

vga

7/8

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

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

C.S.(Comm.Div) No.248 of 2025 and O.A.Nos.944 & 945 of 2025

8/8

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