Judges : SUKUMARAN
V.T.THOMAS - Appellant
Versus
MALAYALA MANORAMA CO.LTD.. - Respondent
Case No : C.M.P. No. 31410 of 1987 in C.M.A. No. 230 of 1987
Decided On : 12/07/1987
Advocates Appeared :
K.S. Rajamony; Sebastian Paul; For Petitioners K.P. Dandapani; Sumathi Dandapani; For Respondents
Copyright Act - Interlocutory Matter - S.17, S.2(d) - The court discussed the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1956, particularly S.17 and S.2(d), and their interpretation in relation to the artistic works of an author made as an employee and the employer's rights. The court emphasized the importance of artistic liberty and concluded that the termination of employment freed the author to create future productions independently.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute involved an ancient publishing house, Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd., and a reputed cartoonist, Toms, in a suit filed under the Copyright Act, 1956. An interlocutory relief was sought, and the court below granted it ad interim and ex parte.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the termination of Toms' employment freed him to create future artistic productions independently, and there was no arguable case for the plaintiff-respondent in relation to the future artistic productions of Toms. The court stayed the portion of the order precluding Toms from drawing the cartoon series 'Boban and Molly' and preventing the appellant-publishers from publishing them.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of the Copyright Act, particularly S.17 and S.2(d), in relation to the artistic works of an author made as an employee and the employer's rights, as well as the maintainability of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of artistic liberty and concluded that the termination of employment freed the author to create future productions independently. The court also held that the appeal was maintainable based on previous decisions.
Final Decision: The court stayed the portion of the order precluding Toms from drawing the cartoon series 'Boban and Molly' and preventing the appellant-publishers from publishing them. The appeal was posted for disposal.
1. A very important issue is involved in this interim petition in an interlocutory matter.
2. More arguments, than would have been necessary for the disposal of the appeal itself, bad been advanced on either side. Having regard to the frame of the petition and the character of the order to be passed, conclusions have to be as brief as possible. It would be superfluous to reiterate that the conclusions indicated are provisional in character. (Indication of such provisional views are not impermissible even in the course of arguments is an opinion entertained by many jurists. One of the eminent men in that line is Lord McCluskey and his views are stated in the Reith Lectures, now published under the title 'Law, Justice and Democracy'.)
3. A definite conclusion is therefore essential, in relation to a final disposal of a matter, albeit interlocutory in character, despite the provisional nature of the conclusion. Supportive reasons, of necessity, must be there as essential ingredients of a judicial conclusion. Judges have therefore necessarily to state, (as did Lord Avory is some distant past): "I may be right or wrong, perhaps more often wrong than right; but I have no doubt about my conclusion."
4. The dispute is between an ancient and established publishing house-Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd., 'Manorama' for short-on the one band and a reputed cartoonist and a different publication - the Kala Kaumudi (different in its pattern, perspective and style) on the other.
5. The matter arises in a suit filed under the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In aid of, and as part of the reliefs claimed in the suit, an interlocutory relief of a far-reaching effect was also sought for. The court below granted it, ad interim and ex parte.
6. It is open to the affected parties, the defendants, to invoke 0.39 R.4 for a variation of that order. The defendants, however, appear to entertain a feeling that the interim order is so unjust and so oppressive that a permissible remedy by way of a direct appeal to the High Court could be immediately and justifiably invoked, even before and, without taking to, such necessarily cumbersome and possibly-time¬consuming process of R.4.
7. There is a question whether the appeal itself is not maintainable. A preliminary contention and prolonged arguments about the entertainment of the appeal bad been urged. For the purpose of this interlocutory matter, I would assume, for reasons indicated in greater detail hereinafter, that the appeal is maintainable, even when the appeal is maintainable, it is for the appellate court to decide whether it should entertain the appeal at all. Ordinarily. I would not have intervened in an appeal from an ad interim ex parte order passed under R.39 0.1(a), having regard to the stage at which the appellate jurisdiction is invoked. There are compulsive situations, however, where the exercise of the appellate jurisdiction is mandated to avert a possible deflection of the course of justice, when the affected party is relegated to the routine process of fighting the interlocutory matter under the normal procedure of 0.39 R.4. The present is one such case, is my conclusion.
8. The literate Kerala would always remember with affection, the childish characters, Boban and Molly, presented to them through the cartoon pages. Children have been enjoying throughout their pranks and mischiefs, their adventures and even admonishable actions. The companion characters include their 'Daddy' (a busy lawyer but without much of exacting briefs) and 'Mummy' and the President of the local authority with his unenviable share of intellectual acumen, and, last but not the least the chummy cur. Toms, as he is popularly known-V. T. Thomas, as described in the plaint has presented them through the pages of Manorama. The arrangement under which such presentation was wade, changed from time to time. Initially, be was'getting small amounts by slips which have to be prepared
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.