No issue either of property or contract involved for granting injunction.

S. S. SUBRAMANI, J.

1st Defendant in O.S. No. 1287 of 1999, on the file of V Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, is the revision petitioner.

2. Plaintiff/Ist respondent filed the suit for permanent injunction against defendants restraining them from producing TV Film or Video Film or regular movie in any language without the consent and knowledge of the plaintiff in any manner and in any capacity whatsoever about late Kamaraj.

3. In the plaint it is said that plaintiff is the grandson of Perunthalaivar Kamaraj and legal heir also. During the last days of that great Leader, plaintiff was looking after him and was assisting him in his day-to-day affairs and personal matters, at Thirumalai Pillai Road House, T. Nagar, Chennai-17. Perunthalaivar Kamaraj was a bachelor and hence he adopted the plaintiff as his son. Plaintiff left his Medical College Studies and was helping Mr. Kamaraj. He also performed the last rites of that great Leader and also performed the death ceremony as per Hindu customs. According to plaintiff, he is the heir of that great Leader. It is said that late Kamaraj was a National Leader, and, after his demise, his only was taken over by Government and the sale amount was given to his family members. The reason for filing the suit was that the first defendant is taking TV serial about the life history of that great Leader and is also attempting to telecast the same through second defendant, purely on commercial basis. According to plaintiff, defendants will be having sponsorship from many advertising companies. Since it is done as a business venture, plaintiff has objection for the same. According to plaintiff, defendants have no right to take any film about the National Leader without the knowledge and consent of plaintiff, since they are not competent persons, to take such films. They should also get permission from plaintiff. It is said that one V.G.P. and Manian creations took video film about Kamaraj, and plaintiff filed in O.S. No. 8018 of 1992 for injunction, and the suit was decreed in his favour.

4. When plaintiff came to know about the intention of defendants, he raised objection on 28-2-1997 when he saw a news items in Tamil Daily 'Dinamalar' first defendant remained silent for some time. Again, on 3-3-1999 plaintiff come to know through a magazine that defendants are preparing to take regular film about the great National Leader. For these reasons, he wanted to restrain the defendants from releasing a movie or telecasting a serial. Along with the suit, plaintiff also filed an application for injunction.

5. The same was seriously opposed by first defendant, petitioner herein. According to him, it is usual is the film trade to produce films and tele serials depicting the life history of great personalities and political leaders. Petitioner herein has further said that plaintiff has not shown any semblance of right as to how he will be prejudiced if the serial is telecast. According to first defendant, film have already been released depicting the life history of great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and John F. Kennedy. Plaintiff has not shown about the existence of any copyright in his favour over any of a rights in the tele-serial. Even assuming that he has got any such copyright in his favour, the City Civil Court has no jurisdiction to by that issue under the Copyright Act. It is further said that the story the tele-serials is based on various true life instances in the life of Mr. Kamaraj and published in different journals. Plaintiff cannot have any grievance if these instances are shown in the form of the tele-serial. First defendant denies that plaintiff is the legal heir of Mr. Kamaraj. He has further said that even as a legal heir, plaintiff has no right to interfere with his production as it is totally a subject conceived and produced by him and it is a work of art which always remains with the person who is the author of the work. According to him, plaintiff has not shown any pri