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

1970 Supreme(Cal) 267

P.N.MUKHERJEE, AMIYA KUMAR MUKHERJI
MAHESWAR SWAIN – Appellant
Versus
BIDYUT PROBHA ART PRESS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Beni Madhav Sett, Goutam Prasad Chatterjee

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THESE appeals are by the plaintiff and they arise out of two suits for damages, injunction and other reliefs in respect of an alleged infringement of the plaintiff's copyright against the defendants.

( 2 ) THE suits have been dismissed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court on the preliminary ground that the suits were not entertainable by the said court.

( 3 ) THE short question, which arises for consideration in these appeals, is whether the learned Judge of the Court below was right in his aforesaid view.

( 4 ) THE suits in question were, obviously under Section 62 of the Copyright Act and, under that section, such suits have to be instituted in the "district court having jurisdiction" vide Sub-section (1 ). For the meaning of the expression "district Court" one has to turn to Section 2 (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, and, on the question of jurisdiction, the immediately relevant sections will be Sections 19 and 20 of the Code. The Copyright Act, in Sub-section (2) of Section 62, contains an extension of this jurisdiction.

( 5 ) IT is clear from the above that, in order that the City Civil Court would be entitled to entertain the present










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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top