Plaintiffs can maintain copyright infringement suit as heirs and executor despite lack of probate; injunction is standard in copyright cases to prevent irreparable harm.

JUDGMENT :

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. 

1. Affidavit of service filed today be taken on record.

2. In view of the extreme urgency involved, and since the issues involved in the interim application and the appeal are identical, we admit the appeal and take up the same for hearing along with the application.

3. The plaintiffs / respondents have filed Title Suit no.01 of 2026 before the learned District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, alleging infringement of the copyright of the appellants by the defendants / present appellant, which is a publishing house of some renown, in respect of literary and artistic works of their predecessor-in-interest who has allegedly left a Will bequeathing the property to the plaintiff/respondent no. 2, in which the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 is the Executrix.

4. In the plaint, it has been inter alia alleged that the literary and artistic work of late Narayan Debnath, an author of considerable fame, is being infringed by the defendant / appellant. It is submitted that although an agreement was entered into in the year 2012 between the said late Narayan Debnath and the defendant / appellant, the same was only for two years and thereafter, without paying adequate royalty, the defendant appellant has been infringing such copyright.

5. The plaintiff no. 1 is the widow of the said deceased author and the plaintiff no. 2 is one of his sons. The plaintiffs allege that their said predecessor executed a last Will and Testament, bequeathing the copyright of his work to plaintiff no. 2, appointing plaintiff no. 1 as the Executrix.

6. On such premise, by the impugned order, the learned District Judge at Alipore granted an ad interim order of injunction restraining the defendant / appellant and / or its men and agents from publishing or in any manner in any other manner printing, selling or offering to sell or distributing, retailing or circulating the artistic and literary work of late Narayan Debnath in the form of books or through online portal, e-commerce, in whatever mode, till February 9, 2026.

7. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the defendant/appellant argues that the impugned order is erroneous in law and in fact on several counts.

8. It is submitted that the appellant has been publishing the works in question for a considerable period and at the eleventh hour, when a book fair is about to commence tomorrow, i.e., from January 22, 2026, the suit was filed and the ad interim injunction was obtained, thereby adversely affecting the prospective revenue to generated by sale of the said works in the book fair and even otherwise.

9. It is submitted that the balance of convenience and inconvenience lies against grant of injunction in view of the huge losses which would be suffered by the defendant / appellant in the event such injunction is permitted to continue.

10. Secondly, learned Senior Counsel submits that there was gross suppression of material facts in the plaint and the injunction application by the plaintiffs / respondents in the Trial Court. in paragraph no.14 of the plaint, it has been stated that late Narayan Debnath, under erroneous legal advice, filed a suit for declaration and injunction before the learned Civil Ju