Vikramajit Sen, J.

1. This Appeal, which has been argued in minute detail and with great vehemence by learned Counsel for the adversaries, raises a neat legal nodus, viz. whether the Copyright Board possesses power to pass interim orders in proceedings under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, 1957 ("Act" for short). Section 31 provides for the grant of a compulsory licence in respect of copyrighted works. The contention of Mr. Akhil Sibal, learned Counsel for the Respondent, is that interim orders or arrangements are not postulated by the said provision of the Act, whereas Mr. C.A. Sundaram and Mr. Sandeep Sethi, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant, contend to the contrary. By the impugned Order, the Copyright Board has come to the conclusion that it was powerless to grant any interim relief, that is, permit the exploitation of a copyrighted work on appropriate terms, during the pendency of proceedings under Section 31 of the Act. If the answer to the first question is that the Board is competent to pass interim orders, then we would have to consider, contemplate and formulate the terms on which interim relief can be granted.

2. Succinctly stated, the Appellant, Music Broa