The central legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of the Assignment Deed and the acquisition of the film's copyright by the plaintiff, based on the evidence presented and the interpretation of the Copyright Act, 1957.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Suit filed under Order IV Rule (1) of the Original Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. Read with sections 2, 13, 14, 51, 55, 58 & 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 for the following reliefs :

a. A permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, distributors, negative right holders, men servants and all concerned from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the tamil feature film titled “Pongadee Neengalaum Unga Kadhalum” starring M.A. Ramakrishnan, Athmiya and Karunya in particular by distributing or exhibiting or releasing the same or communicating it to the public in any manner whatsoever on any date or by dealing with it in any manner whatsoever.

b. directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff, the cost of this proceedings.)

This suit has been filed for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and his men from in any manner infringing the plaintiff's copyright in the Tamil feature film titled “Pongadee Neengalaum Unga Kadhalum” starring M.A. Ramakrishnan, Athmiya and Karunya in particular by distributing or exhibiting or releasing the same or communicating it to the public in any manner whatsoever on any date or by dealing with it in any manner whatsoever.

2. Brief facts of the plaintiff case is as follows :

The defendant is running a proprietor concern, a packaging business under the name and style of 'Wisdom Packers'. He has recently ventured into film production and distribution under the tile “Wisdom Pictures” and purchased, distributed films under the banner of “Maya Movies Banner”. The defendant approached the plaintiff seeking financial assistance to the tune of Rs.70,00,000/- towards purchase of the copyright and all related rights in the Tamil feature film titled “Pongadee Neengalaum Unga Kadhalum” produced by Mr. K.R. Kannan. Accordingly, the plaintiff mobilized the fund of Rs.70,00,000/- and paid to the defendant on 09.10.2013. It was agreed by the defendant that Rs.70,00,000/- shall be paid to the plaintiff on or before 31.12.2013 with the profit of Rs.5 lakhs and in the event of default, it is agreed that the entire copyright of the film and incidental and ancillary rights including, in particular, the negative, distribution and release rights in the said film stand assigned and transferred to the plaintiff on and from 31.12.2013. A deed of assignment of copyright has also been executed in this regard on 09.10.2013. The defendant purchased the entire copyright with all the rights from the producer Mr. K.R. Kannan. The first defendant also proceeded to audio launch of the film on 20.11.2013. However, having purchased the copyright, the defendant failed to pay the amount. Therefore, as per the Assignment Deed, the plaintiff is entitled to the entire copyright of the film by way of assignment. Hence, the suit.

3. Denying the allegations, it is contention of the first defendant that the plaintiff has no means to advance such huge funds. The defendant had finance for the film distribution. He never approached the plaintiff for financial assistance, since the plaintiff is a pauper. The plaintiff introduced one Habibur Rehman to the defendant and the said Habibur Rehman evinced interest in stock trading run by the first defendant and the first defendant has suffered huge loss in the stock trading done. Thereafter, the first defendant and the said Habibur Rehman mutually agreed to share the loss at 50 - 50 ratio and the first defendant had agreed to refund a sum of Rs.29 lakhs to the said Habibur Rehman within a period of one month and issued a blank cheque as a security for refund of the amount and the said cheque was misused by the plaintiff. It is his contention that the signature of the defendant in blank cheques have been utilized for filing the suit with false allegations. The Assignment Deed was not executed by the first defendant in favour of the plaintiff,