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

1995 Supreme(Del) 84

R.C.LAHOTI
LOK NATH PRASAD GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
BIJAY KUMAR GUPTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PARVIN ANAND, R.K.GUPTA

R. C. Lahoti, J.

( 1 ) SECTION 62 of the Copy Right Act, 1957 read in juxtaposition with Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which forum can a plaintiff invoke complaining of infringement of copy right or infringement of any other right conferred by the Copy Right Act, is the question arising for decision.

( 2 ) ON the plaintiff s own showing, and admittedly, the plaintiff and the defendant are both residents of Calcutta. Plaintiff who is engaged in the manufacture and sale of chewing tobacco known as khaini under the trade mark RAJA, claims copy right in the pouch which according to him coupled with distinctive colour combination get-up and lay-out constitutes an original artistic work within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of the Copy Right Act (hereinafter act , for short) and the plaintiff is the owner thereof. He complains of the defendant having reproduced the plainiff s artistic work in his own pouch wherein he sells RATAN Khaini and is thereby committing infringement of the plaintiff s copy right. Vide para 13 the plaintiff states, "the Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit as the defendant is selling its products within the territorial j





























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