IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
G.Radha Rani, J.
Rajkumari Indira Devi - Appellant
Versus
G Satyaki & Ors. - Respondents
C.C.C.A.No.255 of 2018
Decided On : 25-01-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership claims under copyright must be substantiated with valid documentation. (Para 1) |
| 2. copyright ownership and assignment dispute. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. defendant's assertions against plaintiff's claims. (Para 6 , 7 , 19) |
| 4. appeals must challenge the trial court's conclusions based on evidence presented. (Para 8 , 10 , 18) |
| 5. validation of document existence and execution. (Para 12 , 14 , 57) |
| 6. expert evidence in copyright disputes should corroborate admission declarations. (Para 13) |
| 7. judgment confirmation based on legal facts. (Para 15 , 64 , 78) |
| 8. the court affirms trial findings based on consistent assessments. (Para 20 , 80) |
JUDGMENT
G.Radha Rani, J. - This appeal is filed by the appellant who is the defendant No.2 aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 07.02.2018 in O.S.No.419 of 2008 on the file of the XI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
2. The parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed before the trial court.
3. The respondent No.1 is the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed the suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using, publishing, printing and passing off the copyright works titled as "My country, My people" (modern epic) "Naa-desham Naa-prajalu" and other related literary works written by late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma, who was the father of the plaintiff claiming that the plaintiff was the absolute owner of the copyright works of his father and claimed notional damages of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of income and loss of reputation along with costs of the suit.
4. The contention of the plaintiff was that he was the second son and last child of late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma and Smt.Janaki. Late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma was a famous Telugu poet and writer whose works zxwere well identified and were translated into several languages and received innumerable accolades by other academicians, his brethren, the public and literary societies alike during his lifetime. Late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma's works were known for their literary value and public response. Late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma was famously called as Guntur Seshendra Sharma. Out of his love and affection, late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma assigned the copyright works in the literature created by him vide letter dated 02.12.1989 to the plaintiff and transferred all the literary works done by him to the plaintiff. As such, the plaintiff was the sole proprietor of all the literary works written by his father late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma. The plaintiff's father did not retain any rights with him and all rights were transferred to the plaintiff. Pursuant to the letter dated 02.12.1989, the plaintiff had been publishing the books written by his father late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma. The first book was published in the month of April, 1995 titled as "Entakaalam Ee Endamaavulu". The plaintiff had also published the copy of the letter dated 02.12.1989 in the said book. Accordingly, the plaintiff published eight other books titled as "Sahitya Darshini", "Sorabu", "Swarna Hamsa", "Vachindi Votla Rutuvu", "Shodashi, Secrets of Ramayana", "Shabdam nunchi shatabdam varaku" and "Oohalo" containing the original works as well as translation of works written by his father. On 30.05.2007, the plaintiff's father late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma expired. Subsequent to his father's death, the plaintiff published his father's books posthumously beginning with a book titled "Naa Desham - Naa Prajalu", Adhunika Itihasam, "My Country -My People", modern Indian Epic in the month of October, 2007.
4.1. The plaintiff further submitted that late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma survived by his wife Smt.Janaki and other children. On 26.11.2007, there was a public notice issued in the newspaper, "Times of India" and in "Andhra Jyothi" by Smt.Rajkumari Indira Devi Dhanrajgir claiming as wife of late Sri G.Seshendra Sharma and as the owner of the copyright works, and that the same were transferred to her by virtue of letter dated 05.01.2006. The plaintiff issued a reply to
A.Andisamy Chettiar v. A.Subburaj Chettiar
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Another v. Nortel Networks India Private Limited
Balakrishnan v. Malaiyandi Konar
D.S.Lakshmaiah & Another v. L.Balasubramanyam & Another
Haji Mohammed Ishaq Wd. S. K. Mohammed & Ors. v. Mohamed Iqbal and Mohamed Ali and Co.
Jai Narain Parasrampuria (Dead) and Others v. Pushpa Devi Saraf and Others
Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Lala Pancham [AIR 1965 SC 1008
North Eastern Railway Admn. v. Bhagwan Das [(2008) 8 SCC 511]
N. Kamalam (dead) and another v. Ayyasamy and another [(2001) 7 SCC 503]
The State of Gujarat v. Vinaya Chandra Chhota Lal Pathi
Tomaso Bruno and Another v. State of Uttarpradesh
Prem Prakash @ Lillu and Another v. State of Haryana
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Krishna Master and Others
Sanjay Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand
State of U.P. v. Manbodhan Lal Srivastava
S. Rajagopal v. C.M. Armugam & Ors.
Saligram Ruplal Khanna & Another v. Kanwar Rajnath
Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin and another [(2012) 8 SCC 148]
The assignment of copyright by an author remains valid unless explicitly revoked in accordance with statutory requirements; acquiescence does not bar copyright claims when infringement is ongoing.
Plaintiffs can maintain copyright infringement suit as heirs and executor despite lack of probate; injunction is standard in copyright cases to prevent irreparable harm.
An amendment seeking to withdraw a prior admission regarding ownership in copyright is impermissible as it can cause irretrievable prejudice to the opposing party.
The burden of proving ownership of copyright lies with the plaintiff, and failure to disprove the defendant's contentions can lead to dismissal of the suit.
Non-disclosure of documents along with plaint - Documents which are now sought to be filed by the plaintiff were in the power and possession of the plaintiff. The only ground urged for not filing the....
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.