The main legal principle established in the judgment is the distinction between the law of breach of confidence and the law of infringement of copyright, emphasizing the broader right of protection of trust or confidence and the need to show a prima facie case and a reasonable likelihood of success at the trial for infringement.

1. This suit is a breach of confidence action. It also alleges infringement of copyright. The gist of the Plaintiffs' case is that the 1st Plaintiff is the author and first owner of copyright in the original literary work, being the script and screenplay for a film, 'R.S.V.P', which was disclosed in circumstances of confidence to the 1st Defendant, and he made unauthorized use of the same to produce a film, 'Phir Se', without the Plaintiffs' consent. The Plaintiffs seek an interlocutory injunction against release of the film 'Phir Se', complaining of both breach of confidence and infringement of copyright, though what was chiefly argued at the bar was the case of breach of confidence.

2. The 1st Plaintiff is a film and screen writer by profession. In or around 2010, she claims to have conceptualized the plot and story line of a new and original story for a film and commenced working on an original screenplay for a romantic comedy under a working title 'R.S.V.P'. The 1st Plaintiff initially registered the synopsis of the story containing the plot and the story line of 'R.S.V.P' with Film Writers Association ('FWA'), Mumbai in the year 2010. After developing the first draft of the screenplay in 2011, the 1st Plaintiff registered the same with FWA. So also, after fully developing the same with changes and modifications, she registered the final version of the screenplay with FWA in 2012. The 1st Plaintiff, thereafter, through a talent agency, M/s. Tulsee Productions Pvt. Ltd., which pitches authors of films to production houses, approached the 1st Defendant for production of a cinematograph film based on the screenplay of 'R.S.V.P'. The 1st Defendant is a film director of repute, who is also a director of the 2nd Defendant, a film production house. After some preliminary correspondence in that behalf, vide an email dated 19 January 2013, the complete screenplay of 'R.S.V.P' was shared by M/s. Tulsee acting as the 1st Plaintiff's agent with the 1st Defendant, who liked the same and offered to meet the 1st Plaintiff for further discussions. On 21 January 2013, the two met, when the 1st Defendant offered to acquire the rights to make a cinematograph film of 'R.S.V.P' screenplay. The 1st Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant, however, could not reach an agreement in that behalf and the negotiations failed. The first Plaintiff, thereafter, pitched the original screenplay of 'R.S.V.P' to the 2nd Plaintiff, who is another production house. The 2nd Plaintiff agreed to produce the feature film. A formal agreement dated 13 June 2014 was entered into between the Plaintiffs. The 2nd Plaintiff, thereafter, started working on the film. At that stage, the Plaintiffs came across news articles about the 1st Defendant's new film to be launched under the title 'Phir Se'. From the excerpts of interview of the 1st Defendant, the Plaintiffs realized that the 1st Defendant had utilized the 1st Plaintiff's screenplay / script for making his movie. Thereupon, a complaint was filed by the 1st Plaintiff with FWA of plagiarisation and infringement of her copyright in the original screenplay of 'R.S.V.P'. The 1st Plaintiff also sent a cease and desist notice to the 1st Defendant. On the Plaintiff's complaint, FWA constituted a panel of experts to review and compare the rival screenplays / scripts of 'Phir Se' and 'R.S.V.P'. A complaint was also filed by the 2nd Plaintiff before Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (“IMPPA”). A Joint Dispute Settlement Committee of IMPPA and FWICE (Federation of Western India Cine Employees) issued a letter dated 8 November 2014 to the 1st Defendant, asking him to stop all shooting till the matter was resolved. On 25 November 2014, FWA gave a ruling in favour of the 1st Plaintiff, observing inter alia that on a careful consideration of the opinions of their esteemed experts and also taking into account the fact that the 1st Defendant had heard the 1st Plaintiff's script before completing his script, the various p