1. The suit has been filed inter alia for a declaration of the Plaintiff’s exclusive ownership of copyright and all associated intellectual property rights in the suit songs. The Interim Application seeks restraining orders against the Defendant from violating the Plaintiff’s copyright ownership by showing, releasing, launching, airing, publishing, communicating, etc. to the public, monetizing or exploiting or dealing with the contents of the suit songs. and to forthwith take down and remove the suit songs or any other musical works, composition, sound recordings, remix, etc. from all media and digital or physical mediums. The Application further seeks direction to the Defendant to deliver all master recordings, stems, raw files, lyrics relating to the suits songs in the possession, custody and control of the Defendant.

2. The Plaintiff came with the case that by virtue of the Music Director Agreement, Lyric Writer Agreement, Singer Agreement and Talent Management Agreement all dated 16th December, 2023, the services of the Defendant were commissioned by the Plaintiff as producer for writing the lyrics of the songs, composing the music and rendering services as singer of the suit songs. By the Talent Management Agreement dated 16th December, 2023, the Defendant agreed to assign marketing rights for period of seven years. The Plaintiff’s claim of exclusive copyright ownership in suit songs is based on these Agreements. It is stated that the consideration as agreed and mentioned in the Agreements has been duly paid. The Plaintiff has incurred substantial pre-production and post-production costs by engaging services of music arrangers and service providers for fine tuning the works before release.

3. The dispute commenced between the parties upon an email dated 18th July, 2025 being addressed by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs seeking to reclaim 100% ownership rights in the suit songs due to delay in release of the suit songs. There was exchange of correspondence between the parties and a proposal for final resolution was given by the Defendant on 31st July, 2025 that (a) the suit songs be released on 7th August, 2025 (b) full credit be given to the Defendant and (c) payment of Rs 50,000/- to be made within seven days. In response, the Plaintiff forwarded Rs 10,000/- which was not accepted by the Defendant.

4. On 8th August, 2025, the Defendant released the suit songs on various online and streaming platforms with disclaimer that the suit songs are Defendant’s original works solely created and owned by the Defendant. It is stated that the Defendant has performed these assigned works at live shows, concerts, and events and commercially exploited them without obtaining prior written consent and hence, the suit came to be filed.

5. In Affidavit-in-reply, the contention is that the consideration agreed between the parties was Rs 50,000/- for 10 songs and 50% share in royalty in addition to Rs 20,000/- as personal expenses and Rs. 8,000/- as travelling expenses till period of signing. There was also an assurance that the Defendant would be the official singer, lyricist, model for all ten songs. It is contended that the Plaintiff’s directors called the Defendant to their office and dishonestly, deceitfully, fraudulently took his signature on the agreements without allowing the Defendant to read the contracts and without handing over copies of the contract. It is stated that on many pages of the alleged Agreements, the Plaintiff’s director has forged the signature of Defendant. The Defendant was facing financial hardships due to delayed release of the suit songs compelling the Defendant to release his compositions on social platforms as the Defendant has already rescinded the fraudulent agreements. It is contended that at the time of signing the Agreement, the Defendant was informed by Plaintiff’s directors that they are taking signature of Defendant on Agreement for six songs and four songs as lyricist, composer and singer and not for