JUDGMENT:-The plaintiff sues for declaration that he is the owner of the copyright in a Tamil story, ‘nazhuval’ written by him, for a permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 and 2 from exploiting a film, ‘Iru Malargal, which is said to be a reproduction of the plaintiff’s story, and for recovery of damages to the tune of Rs. 40,000. The defendants in their answers deny the basis of the plaintiff’s claim. Seven issues were framed by Palaniswamy, J., on 6th August, 1970. On the 13th November, 1970, the second defendant filed an additional answer raising the additional plea that the suit is not maintainable for non-registration of the plaintiff’s copyright in the story ‘nazhuval’.

2. The following additional issue No. 8 is framed:

"Whether the plaintiff’s suit, is not maintainable for non-registration of his copyright in the story ‘nazhuval’?

3. Preliminary arguments were advanced upon issue No, 8, and I shall proceed to give my finding thereon.

4. Admittedly, the plaintiff, whose story was published in the issue of the ‘Ananda Vikatan’ dated 19th May, 1963, has not registered his copyright therein. The contention of the second defendant is that although the plaintiff might have acquired a copyright in the story, he is not entitled to enforce the same without registration thereof. I would have dismissed this contention without serious notice but for the observations made by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in support of this contention. Those observations have been reported in Mishra Bandhu Karyalaya v. S. Koshel1, at page 267 and are as follows:

"The Indian Copyright Act, 1914, had nowhere made any provision for the registration of copyrights. Under the Copyright Act, 1957, it appears that under sections 13 and 45, the registration of a book with the Registrar of Copyrights, is a condition for acquiring copyright with respect to it. A plain reading of the several provisions of the Act, leaves no doubt in our minds that a copyright in a book now is only secured if it is an original compilation and has been duly registered according to the provisions of the 1957 Act. Once it is so registered, the author is deemed to acquire property rights in the book. The right arising from the registration of the book can be the subject-matter of civil or criminal remedy, so that, without it the author can have no rights, nor remedies inspite of the fact that his work is an original one. We are however, concerned with the state of law prevalent under the Imperial Copyright Act, 1911, enacted by the British Parliament, subject to such modifications as stated in the Indian Copyright Act, 1914."

The last sentence shows that the previous observations quoted above were entirely in the nature of obiter. I feel constrained, with great respect, to disagree with the obiter dicta of their Lordships and to hold that both under the Copyright Act, 1957 and under the Copyright Act of 1914, the legal position is the same, viz., that regardless of registration, the author acquires a copyright in his work, and non-registration thereof does not di able the owner of the copyright from bringing an infringement action. I shall presently show with reference to the several provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957, that registration is not a pre-requisite to the acquisition of a copyright.

5. Although in Chapter H of the Act, a machinery has been provided for registration of copyrights, there is no provision therein which requires compulsory registration of copyrights. Neither Chapter XI, which deals with infringement of copyright. nor Chapter XII, which deals with civil remedies, provides that nonregistration of a copyright shall have any penal consequences.

6. Section 17 says that subject to the provisions of this Act, the author of a work shall be the first owner of the copyright therein. But it is not in every kind of work that copyright can be claimed because section 13 provides;

"Subject to the provisions of this section and the other provisions of thi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document