The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a plaintiff to prove their right to copyright ownership and exploitation rights, as well as the necessity to comply with the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1956, including the requirement for the assignee to exploit the assigned rights within a specified period.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of O.S. Rules read with Section 7 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Appellate Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (4 of 2016) read with Section 55 and 62 (2) of the Copyright Act and Order VII Rule-1 of CPC,

a) For declaration, declaring the Plaintiff is the sole and absolute copyright owner in respect of telecasting 3 films more fully set out in the Schedule of List hereunder through cable, cable TV, Cable TV Channel, Set Top Box, etc. throughout the area of entire Tamil Nadu as contemplated in the agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant;

b) For a Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendants their men, servants, agents, etc., from in any manner interfering or infringing the copyright owned by the Plaintiff in respect of telecasting 3 Movies more fully set out in the schedule of list hereunder through cable, cable TV, cable TV Channel, Set Top Box, etc. throughout the area of entire Tamilnadu, as contemplated in the agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant;

c ) cost of the suit; and d) grant such further or other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.)

1. The above suit is filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that the plaintiff is the sole and absolute copyright owner in respect of the three films set out in the schedule to the plaint, through cable, cable TV, cable TV channels, set top boxes, etc., throughout the State of Tamil Nadu and for a permanent injunction in respect of thereto.

2. It is the case of the plaintiff that they acquired the rights from the 1st defendant who is the producer, world negative rights holder and copyright owner of the films, Sathru, Vyjayanthi I.P.S, Thilagavathi CBI, hereinafter collectively called the Films. The 1st defendant has assigned the rights in the Films to the 2nd defendant under an agreement of assignment dated 18.07.2003 and the 2nd defendant inturn had assigned the said rights to the plaintiff for a period of 99 years under an agreement dated 25.01.2018. The plaintiff was assured that the assignors had not assigned the said rights to any third parties and the rights that were assigned to the plaintiff were unencumbered and in the event of any dispute arising in respect of the Films, they would keep indemnified the plaintiff against any loss / claim for damages.

3. The plaintiff would submit that the 3rd defendant who is also carrying on business in Satellite Television networks, was constantly interfering with the cable TV operators to whom the plaintiff had assigned the rights to telecast the Films through cable TV, Set top boxes, etc., by claiming that they are the owners of the Films. The plaintiff would submit that she has approached the 3rd defendant to give proof of their copyright to the said movies and the 3rd defendant, instead of producing the agreement of assignment, has given a false complaint to the Inspector of Police, Teynampet and added to this they are interfering and infringing with the copyright of the plaintiff.

4. The plaintiff would submit that they are the absolute copyright holders of the Films and the 3rd defendant without any valid copyright, is continuously interfering and infringing the copyright enjoyed by the plaintiff and therefore the plaintiff has filed the above suit.

5. The defendants 1 and 2 though served, had not entered appearance and were set ex parte. The 2nd defendant was set ex parte on 19.06.2019 and the 1st defendant was set ex parte by order dated 04.10.2019. It is only the 3rd defendant who is contesting the suit.

6. The 3rd defendant had filed a written statement, inter alia denying the allegations contained in the plaint. At the outset, they would submit that the suit has been instituted by the plaintiff only with the ulterior motive of escaping from liability in the criminal proceedings initiated agai