( 1 ) THE second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21-03-2005, passed by the learned IX Additional Chief judge, City Civil Court (Fast Track Court), hyderabad, in A. S. No. 168 of 2004.

( 2 ) THE unsuccessful defendants are the appellants. The respondent herein filed the suit in O. S. No. 872 of 1998 on the file of the vii Seniorcivil Judge, Hyderabad for recovery of money of Rs. 1,25,000/- with interest at 24% per annum against the defendants and that suit having been decreed by the trial Court by its judgment, dated 01-12-2003, the defendants carried the matter in appeal and underthe impugned judgment and decree the appellate Court confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. As aforesaid, the defendants are assailing the same.

( 3 ) WHEN the second appeal came up for admission, both the learned counsel appearing forthe parties agreed to address the arguments forfinal disposal of the appeal and accordingly arguments were addressed.

( 4 ) THE case of the plaintiff was that he was former Vice-Chancellor of University of hyderabad and a poet, novelist, short story writer of international repute and was conferred with the honour of padmabhushan . The defendants 2 and 3 the chairman and regional representative of the first defendant company, approached him for revision of their book series entitled holy Faith Direct Approach to interactive English and offered to pay at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per each book. The plaintiff accepted the offer for revising the books to the satisfaction of the defendants. Accordingly, he revised the books and the defendants having collected the books in the month of september, 1997, paid only amount of rs. 75,000/- leaving the balance amount of rs. 1,25,000/-to be paid. The plaintiff sentthe reminder, dated 02-01 -1998, to the defendants for payment of the balance and when the defendants failed to pay the same, he got a legal notice, dated 29-07-1998, issued to them and eventually filed the suitfor recovery of the said amount with interest at 24% per annum.

( 5 ) THE defendants contended that the plaintiff approached the third defendant and requested him to use his good offices by entrusting the work of revision of the book series and to pay an amount of Rs. 75,000/- towards his remuneration in advance. As the plaintiff was in need of money and as he promised to revise the books and give them in one month, he was paid an amount of rs. 75,000/- but the plaintiff could not submit the books within one month. He was requested to return the amount of Rs. 75,000/- as he was not evincing any interest. On account of the delay on the part of the plaintiff, the defendants were put to hardship and loss. Ultimately, books were returned virtually without any revision. No educational institution would accept the illegal corrections made by the plaintiff in the books and further he did the work in utter violation causing infringement of rights under the Copyright Act and therefore the suit was liable to be dismissed.

( 6 ) THE Court of first instance framed the following issues for trial:" (1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of sum of Rs. 1,50,657. 52ps from defendants? (2) To what Relief?"

( 7 ) THE plaintiff examined himself as P. W. 1 and got Exs. A-1 to A-15 marked. The third defendant examined himself as D. W. 1 and got Exs. B-1 to B-8 marked. Appreciating the evidence, both oral and documentary, adduced on the point, eventually the trial Court held that the defendants offered to the plaintiff to pay at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- for each volume and that the plaintiff could not be held to have violated the provisions of the Copyright Act, inasmuch as the defendants being the publishers it was their bounden duty to obtain permission or authorization from the origina writer of the books. Consequently, the suit was decreed as prayed for.

( 8 ) THE appellate Court framed the following points for determination:" (1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery

Click Here to Read the rest of this document