SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1978 Supreme(Pat) 185

PATNA HIGH COURT
Manoranjan Prasad, J.
Radha Kishna Sinha And Another
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 792 of 1977 ;
Decided On : AUGUST 21, 1978

Headnote:Copy Rights Act Sec. 45 - Registration of copy - right is not compulsory nor it is a condition precedent for acquisition of property right-If there is an infringement registration is no bar to taking cognizance.

       (A.I.R. 1972 Cal 533 & A.I.R. 1976 Mad 22 followed, A.I.R. 1960 A.P. 415 and A.I.R. 1970 M.P. 251 dissented from, (Para 6)

       

Judgment

1. This application under Sec. 482 of the Cr. P. C, 1973, is for quashing the order dated the 21st February 1977, passed by Shri L. Narayan, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Complaint case No. 429 (C) of 1976 taking cognizance against the two petitioners and one Rameshwar Prasad, Proprietor, Law Printers, Patna, under Sec. 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

2. On the 28th July, 1976, the opposite party No. 2 had filed a complaint petition in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, against the two petitioners and the above named Rameshwar Prasad, besides two others, under Sec. 63 of the Act. The case of the complainant was that he was the son and the legal representative of C. P. Malhotra, Proprietor, M/s. Malhotra Bros., Fraser Road, Patna, which deals in the business of law and reference books publication. The said C. P. Malhotra was confined to bed because of his protracted illess since 1973 and, as such, the publication work was being solely managed and done by the complainant for M/s. Malhotra Bros. C. P. Malhotra is the original publisher of the compilation work "The Bihar Service Code", which was for the first time published in the year 1957 in two parts. The latest eighth edition of the Bihar Service Code was printed and compiled in two different desings which were published simultaneously on the 25th May, 1976, in which the complainant by exerting his own labour and skill got cited or enumerated the comments by K. K. Malhotra, Chief Editor, Bihar Revenue and Labour Journal, on the different sections and provisions in a most suitable and impressive way so as to produce easy grasp and understanding of the interpretations in the minds of the readers. The complainant also got inserted summarised case laws in his own language and manner after minute studies of the authorities cited in different journals for its compilation. The compilation work and its arrangements and the citation of commentaries done by K. K. Malhotra are the original work of the complainant with regard to the Bihar Service Code which gives origin to the copyright reserved by him. The Bihar Service Code, eighth edition, was made available in the market in sufficient number and the same was highly appreciated because of the excellent and impressive compilation work and its unique arrangements. Recently, on the 12th July, 1976, the complainant was informed that another publication of the Bihar Service Code under the authorship of petitioner No. 1 was published by his son, petitioner No. 2, the proprietor of the Eastern Law Book Agency, Patna, in which most of the compilation work are reproduction of the original work of Bihar Service Code, eighth edition, published by the complainant. The complainant immediately purchased several Copies of the new Bihar Service Code published by petitioner No. 2, and on its close scrutiny and perusal, it transpired that it was a complete reproduction of the original Bihar Service Code, eighth edition, published by the complainant. The instances of reproduction and similarity with the original work are fully incorporated in Annexure-A which forms part of the complaint petition. The said Bihar Service Code under the authorship of petitioner No. 1 which was published by petitioner No. 2 was printed by the Law Printers, Patna, exclusively run under the sole proprietorship of Rameshwar Prasad. Some other allegations were also made against two other persons which need not be stated here as no cognizance was taken against them. A prayer was made by the complainant in the complaint petition for taking cognizance of the offence under Sec. 63 of the Act against the two petitioners and the said Rameshwar Prasad and two others who were made accused in the complaint petition.

3. After examining the complainant on solemn affirmation and also examining two witnesses on behalf of the complainant and after comparing the complainants publication of the Bihar Service Code, eighth editi









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top