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

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FRANKFINN ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
UNISYS INFOSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. & ORS. – Respondent
CS(COMM)-192/2021



Page 1 of 27

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Pronounced on: 2nd March, 2022

+

CS(COMM) 192/2021, I.A.5727/2021 (by the plaintiff u/O

XXXIX R- 1 & 2 CPC), I.A.6086/2021 (by the plaintiff u/O

XXXIX R-2A CPC), I.A. 6250/2021 (by the proposed D-4 u/O I

Rule 10 CPC), I.A. 7062/2021 (by the D-l u/O XXXIX R-4

CPC) and I.A.7691/2021 (by the plaintiff u/O XXXIX R-2A)

FRANKFINN ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY PVT. LTD.

..... Plaintiff

Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Senior

Advocate with Mr. Kapil Midha,

Ms. Pritika Juneja and Ms. Versha

Singh, Advocates

Versus

UNISYS INFOSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. & ORS. .....Defendants

Through:

Mr. Asutosh Lohia, Mr. Rohan

Dewan

and

Ms.Shraddha

Bhargava, Advocates for D-1

Mr. Arjun Natarajan, Mr. Mayank

Sapra and Ms. Lakshmi Kant

Srivastava, Advocates for D-2

Mr. Aditya Gupta and Ms.Aishwarya

Kane and Mr. Raunaq Kamath,

Advocates for D-3

Mr. Sagar Chandra, Ms. Sakshi

Pande and Ms. Urvashi Garg,

Advocates for applicant/proposed

D-4 in I.A. 6250/2021

2022:DHC:778

Page 2 of 27

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON

O R D E R

1.

This order will dispose of five applications, namely, (i)

I.A.5727/2021 filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2

CPC, (ii) I.A.6086/2021 filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX R-2A

CPC, (iii) I.A.7691/2021 filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX R-2A

CPC, (iv) I.A.7062/2021 filed by the defendant No.1 under Order

XXXIX Rule 4 CPC, and (v) I.A.6250/2021 filed by the applicant/Indya

Records and Films Private Limited (i.e., proposed defendant No.4) under

Order I Rule 10 CPC for impleadment.

2.

Before proceeding further, a few facts may be noted. The plaintiff

is an integrated Media and Entertainment Company and is a part of a

Group Company division, namely, „Frankfinn Institute of Air Hostess

Training‟, which is a reputed organization, engaged in the field of

imparting trainings in the field of Aviation, Hospitality, Travel

Management and Customer Services. It claims to have set up the largest

network of „State of the Art‟ Cent res in India and built a formidable

reputation for quality training, earning several awards. Since 2007, it has

also entered the arena of music and had its first home entertainment

release. It has also produced a movie named, “SAT SRI AKAL”, which

was released in the year 2008 in theatres and later, on VCD/DVD and

thereafter, on Netflix. Thus, over a period of time, the plaintiff has also

2022:DHC:778

Page 3 of 27

established a name in the field of religious preaching, music and home

entertainment and claims to have emerged as a leading player in Shabad

Gurbani videos and audios.

3.

Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, learned senior counsel for the plaintiff,

submitted that the defendant No.3/Google LLC is an online video sharing

platform, allowing users to upload, view, rate, share, etc., videos and

create channels for uploading various contents. The defendant No.2-

M/s.Indya Records, through its proprietor Mr.Kanwal Deep Kohli,

created a YouTube channel, initially called, „Divine Amrit Bani‟ for and

on behalf of the plaintiff. The content for uploading on the said channel

was provided solely by the plaintiff. The YouTube channel was renamed

“Shabad Kirtan Gurbani –Divine Amrit Bani” having URL

www.youtube.com/user/divineamritbani (hereinafter referred to as the

“Suit Channel”), and is available on the platform of defendant No.3.

4.

According to the plaintiff, the defendant No.2 used to manage the

Suit Channel for the plaintiff and there was no doubt about the ownership

of the channel vesting with the plaintiff. However, the defendant No.1 has

unlawfully started asserting ownership rights in respect of the Suit

Channel, on the basis of some arrangement with the defendant No.2,

which was also only to manage the Suit Channel. This was evident from

the „About Section‟, which showed the plaintiff as the rightful owner and

the employees of the plaintiff a

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top