SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 51500

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice M. SUNDAR
Sony Music Entertainment Ind – Appellant
Versus
Sun TV Network Ltd. – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 09.09.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR C.S.No.304 of 2017 (Comm. Suit)

Sony Music Entertainment India Private Limited A Private Limited Company incorporated and registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, Having its registered office at 92, Main Avenue Santacruz (West), Mumbai - 400 054. .. Plaintiff Vs.

Sun TV Network A company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 Having its registered office at Murasoli Maran Towers, 73, MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai-600 028, Tamil Nadu. .. Defendant This Civil Suit is preferred, under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules 1994 read with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC and Sections 51, 55 and 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, (a) A permanent injunction, restraining the defendant, its servant, directors, agents or any other persons/entity claiming through or under them, in any manner, directly or indirectly, using, allowing or causing it to be used, communicating to the public by any mode whatsoever, medium, device, wire or wireless means, making copies of, exploiting, allowing or causing it to be exploited, otherwise communicating to the public by any mode whatsoever, using/embodying, performing the sound recordings and images forming part of plaintiff's content details of which are given in Schedule A hereto, via the defendant's said channel or any other network/channel of the defendant and/or its online website www.sunnetwork.in and WAP/mobile sites and applications which can be accessed by consumers/end users on internet enabled digital devices, so as not to infringe the plaintiff's copyright in the same;

(b) A permanent injunction, restraining the defendant, its servant, directors, agents or any other persons/entity claiming through or under them, in any manner, directly or indirectly, using, allowing or causing it to be used, communicating to the public by any mode whatsoever, medium, device, wire or wireless means, making copies of, exploiting, allowing or causing it to be exploited, otherwise communicating to the public by any mode whatsoever, using/embodying, performing new cinematograph films created with new visuals synchronized versions / new adapted sound recordings and / or master sound recordings, based on underlying musical works and literary works, owned and controlled by the plaintiff and forming part of the plaintiffs' content detailed in Schedule A hereto, via the defendant's said channel or any other network / channel of the defendant and / or its online website www.sunnetwork.in and WAP/mobile sites and applications which can be accessed by consumers/end users on internet enabled digital devices, so as not to infringe the plaintiff's copyright in the same;

(c) A preliminary decree be granted to direct the defendant to render true and faithful accounts of profits earned by the defendant by use of the plaintiff's copyrighted works and a final decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff for the amount of profits thus found to have been made after the defendant have rendered accounts;

(d) Directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,00,000/-

towards punitive damages along with 18% interest per annum until the date of realization;

(e) Directing the defendant to pay costs of this suit to the plaintiff;

For Plaintiff : Mr.Abishek Jenasenan along with Ms.Aparajitha Vishwanath For Defendant : Mr.Rahul Balaji along with Ms.Tanushree Arvind

J U D G M E N T

Captioned suit has been listed under the cause list caption 'FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT'.

2. Mr.Abishek Jenasenan along with Ms.Aparjitha Viswanath, learned counsel for plaintiff company and Mr.Rahul Balaji along with Ms.Tanushree Arvind, learned counsel for defendant company are before this Court.

3. Learned counsel on both sides submit that the lis has been settled between the plaintiff and defendant companies and terms of settlement have been reduced to writing vide a 'document dated 22.08.2022 {styled / captioned 'CONSENT TERMS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAIN

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top