Back
2012 (3) Supreme 273
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Altamas Kabir, Surinder Singh Nijjar & Chelameswar, JJ.
Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. — Appellant
versus
Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. — Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos.4196-4197 of 2012 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos .26581-26582 of 2011)
Decided on 04-05-2012
Copyright Act, 1957- Section 31 - Whether on a complaint made to the Copyright Board under Section 31 of Act, 1957, said Board under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) can pass an interim order in the pending complaint- The language used in the Section 31 clearly contemplated a final order after a hearing and after holding an inquiry to see whether the ground for withholding of the work from the public was justified or not- There is no hint of any power having been given to Board to make interim arrangements, such as, grant of interim compulsory licences, during the pendency of a final decision of an application-Instantly, power being sought to be attributed to Copyright Board involved the grant of final relief, which was the only relief contemplated under Section 31 of Copyright Act- Even in matters under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an interim relief granting the final relief can be given after exercise of great caution and in rare and exceptional cases- In the instant case, such a power was not even vested in the Copyright Board - Hence the question of granting interim relief by grant of an interim compulsory licence could not arise- To grant an interim compulsory licence during the stay of the proceedings would amount to granting the final relief at the interim stage, although the power to grant such relief had not been vested in the Board-Impugned judgment of High Court set aside-Appeals allowed (Paras 42 to 45)
Facts of the Case :
Issue in consideration in present appeals was whether on a complaint made to the Copyright Board under Section 31 of Act, 1957, said Board under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) can pass an interim order in the pending complaint.
Findings of the Court :
A.In the instant case, the power being sought to be attributed to the Copyright Board involved the grant of the final relief, which was the only relief contemplated under Section 31 of the Copyright Act. Even in matters under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an interim relief granting the final relief should be given after exercise of great caution and in rare and exceptional cases. In the instant case, such a power was not even vested in the Copyright Board and hence the question of granting interim relief by grant of an interim compulsory licence could not arise. To grant an interim compulsory licence during the stay of the proceedings would amount to granting the final relief at the interim stage, although the power to grant such relief has not been vested in the Board.
B. If the legislature had intended that the Copyright Board should have powers to grant mandatory injunction at the interim stage, it would have vested the Board with such authority. Impugned judgment of High Court set aside. Appeals were allowed.
JUDGMENT
Altamas Kabir, J.-Leave granted.
2. The sole question for consideration in these appeals is whether on a complaint made to the Copyright Board under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, 1957, the said Board under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) can pass an interim order in the pending complaint. Since, we shall be dealing with the said section throughout this judgment, the same is extracted hereinbelow :
“31. Compulsory licence in works withheld from public.-
(1) If at any time during the term of copyright in any Indian work which has been published or performed in public, a complaint is made to the Copyright Board that the owner of copyright in the work-
(a) has refused to republish or allow the re-publication of the work or has refused to allow the performance in public of the work, and by reason of such refusal the work is withheld from the public; or
(b) has refused to allow communication to the public by [broadcast], of such work or in the case of a [sound recording] the work recorded in such [sound recording], on terms which the complainant considers reasonable, the Copyright Board, after giving to the owner of the copyright in the work a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding such inquiry as it may deem necessary, may, if it is satisfied that the grounds for such refusal are not reasonable, direct the Registrar of Copyrights to grant to the complainant a licence to re-publish the work, perform the work in public or communicate the work to the public by [broadcast], as the case may be, subject to payment to the owner of the copyright of such compensation and subject to such other terms and conditions as the Copyright Board may determine; and thereupon the Registrar of Copyrights shall grant the licence to the complainant in accordance with the directions of Copyright Board, on payment of such fee as may be prescribed.
Explanation.-In this sub-section, the expression “Indian work” includes-
(i) an artistic work, the author of which is a citizen of India; and
(ii) a cinematograph film or a [sound recording] made or manufactured in India.
(2) Where two or more persons have made a complaint under sub-section (1), the licence shall be granted to the complainant who in the opinion of the Copyright Board would best serve the interests of the general public.”
3. However, in order to consider the said question, it is necessary to set out some of the facts giving rise to the said question.
4. These appeals preferred by Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., hereinafter referred to as “Super Cassettes”, are directed against the order dated 1st September, 2011, passed by the Delhi High Court whereby it reversed the order passed by the Copyright Board on 28th March, 2011, in which the Board held that it did not have the power to grant an interim compulsory licence. By its judgment and order dated 1st September, 2011 in R.F.A.No.250 of 2011 and C.M.No.8977 of 2011, the High Court reversed the finding of the Copyright Board upon holding that even while the grant of compulsory licence under Section 31 of the Copyright Act was under consideration, an interim compulsory licence could be granted. The High Court also held that where the dispute is over the quantum of licence fee, an interim compulsory licence had to be granted. The impugned order directs the Copyright Board to grant an interim compulsory licence against Super Cassettes with the further direction to the Board to fix its own terms for such licences, after hearing the parties.
5. Appearing for Super Cassettes, Mr. Amit Sibal, learned counsel, submitted that on 16th May, 2008, this Court had decided the two set of cases, in which it upheld the setting aside of the compulsory licence granted against Super Cassettes by the Copyright Board in relation to Entertainment Network India Ltd., hereinafter referred to as “ENIL”, a radio broadcaster. In the other set of matters, where Super Cassettes was not a party, this Court upheld the grant of compulsory licence in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
