A.No.1616 of 2022

in

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.31 of 2021

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J

This application is filed for permission to mark the affidavit dated

22.11.2021 of Rema R Pillai. The applicant states that the dispute pertains to the

identity of the executant of an agreement dated 05.12.2000. Ms.Rema R Pillai is

one of the attesting witnesses to the said document. It is further stated that she is

of an advanced age and resides at Kerala.

2. The respondent/first defendant opposes this application on the

ground that the affidavit cannot be taken on record unless the deponent thereof

is examined as a witness.

3. There is merit in the objection of the first defendant that an

affidavit cannot be relied upon unless the contesting party has the opportunity to

cross-examine the deponent of such affidavit on the contents of the affidavit.

Accordingly, this application is allowed subject to the condition that the

deponent of the affidavit shall be made available for cross-examination by the

first defendant and any other contesting party. In addition, the defendants are

permitted to raise objections inter alia on the grounds of relevance and proof.

1/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J

kal

The defendants are also permitted to file an affidavit of admission/denial in

respect of this document on or before 08.06.2022

List on 08.06.2022.

20.04.2022

kal

(2/2)

A.No.1616 of 2022

in

C.S. (Comm. Div.) No.31 of 2021

2/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

This suit is filed seeking injunctive relief, rendition of accounts and damages in

5/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

respect of alleged infringement in the copyright over the cinemautographic film

'Aravalli'.

Both the first defendant and second and third defendants have filed

applications under Order 13 A of the Civil Procedure Code is applicable to

commercial dispute seeking a summary judgment. The said applications are

filed on a common basis. In specific, the applicants assert the admitted position

is that the movie 'Aravalli'was released in the year 1957. As per Section 26 of

the Copyright Act 1957, the term of copyright in cinemautograpic film subsets

for a period of 60 years commencing from the start of the calender year

following the order in which the work is prepared. Consequently, it is asserted

that the copyright in the movie concerned subsisted only until the year 2018. As

a corollary, the respective applicants assert that there is no real prospect of the

plaintiff succeeding on the suit claim. The defendant is unable to controvert the

assertion of the respective applicants.

On examining Section 26 of the Copyright Act 1957, the assertion of

the respective applicants that the term of the copyright in a cinemautographic

film is for a period of 60 years beginning from the calender year following the

oder in which the film was released is liable to be accepted. Given the admitted

factual position that the film was released in the year 1957, the term of

6/2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

copyright should be computed from 01.01.1958. On such basis, the term of

copyright expired in the year 2018. As a consequence, the plaintiff cannot claim

ownership over the copyright. The basis of he sit is the allged ownership of the

copyright over the relevant cinemautographic film. Once the sub spectrum

collapses, the plaintiff has no real prospect of successful prosecuting the suit.

Under Order 13A, an application for summary judgment is to be tested on two

grounds, namely, whether the plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding on

the claim and whether there is any other compiling reason to direct parties to

adduce oral evidence. In this case, the requirements of Rule 3 Order 13A are

fully satisfied. Consequently, the respective applicant is entitled to succeed.

Therefore, C.S.(Comm.Div) No.103 of 2021 is disposed of summ