Delhi District Court
This Order Of Mine Shall Decide The ... vs Abdus Sami on 30 April, 2015
IN THE COURT OF SH. PRANJAL ANEJA, LD. CIVIL JUDGE-06/
CENTRAL TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Suit. No. 706/14 30.04.2015
ABDUL MOIN V. ABDUS SAMI
ORDER
1. This order of mine shall decide the application u/o XXXIX rule 1 and 2 CPC filed on 01.11.13 praying that the defendant, his agents, distributors, book-sellers, stockists etc. be restrained from printing, publishing, distributing and selling, offering for sale advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in the book 'Studies in Islam' from Grade I to VIII (English) and / or from infringing the copyrights of the plaintiff in the said book till the disposal of the present suit.
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the plaint, necessary to be seen are that defendant is the brother of the plaintiff and plaintiff is owner of copyright of literary work of Studies in Islam, Grade I to VII in English as authored by Maulvi Abdul Aziz and the said author has given the complete and absolute right of print and publish in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has got registered the said copyrights with Copyright Registrar, Government of India, on 26.5.92 and since then the plaintiff has exclusive copyrights of printing, publishing, distribution, trading and sale of the said book. That plaintiff has also got copyrights of Grade VIII of the said book Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 1 of 6 Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015 and has applied for its registration.
3. The plaintiff had, however, constituted a partnership business in the name of M/s Islamic Book Service in which plaintiff, defendant and another brother of the plaintiff were partners and this firm was carrying on business of publisher, printer and distributor of various Islamic Books. That plaintiff consented for the publication, printing and distribution of the said book through the said partnership firm and plaintiff had never abandoned his copyrights in the said literary work. That later on said partnership was dissolved and the plaintiff withdrawn the consent and permission for publishing, printing and distribution. That defendant has however turned hostile and has not even implemented the settlement of the said partnership business, its assets etc.
4. It is alleged that plaintiff has orally requested the defendant not to publish, print or distribute the sale of said book but defendant has neglected. That plaintiff also served legal notice dt. 17.9.13 withdrawing all permission regarding the said book. But defendant has not replied. It is further alleged that defendant has illegally been disturbing and selling the said book which is apparent from the cash Memo No. CM 582 dt. 03.10.13 as per which he has sold Grade I to VIII of the said book, that defendant is the Director of M/s Islamic Book Service, Pvt. Ltd. in which name the said cash memo has been issued. That defendant has by his illegal acts already sold out huge Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 2 of 6 Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015 quantity of books and thus caused huge substantial economic losses as well as loss of goodwill to the plaintiff.
5. In WS, it is stated that earlier in the year 2012, plaintiff issued a false and frivolous notice and also filed a false suit bearing CS (OS) No. 2943/12 before Hon'ble High Court of Delhi which is still pending. Despite that plaintiff with malafide intention, has filed the present suit knowing well that copyright of the said work is with Ms/ Islamic Book Service and Maulvi Abdul Aziz had also given an affidavit on 06.07.89 declaring that M/s Islamic Book Service is the owner of all rights in the world. That the plaintiff, defendant and their another brother Abdul Naeem were having their joint business and running the same under different name and style and they consented voluntarily to dissolve all joint businesses and accordingly an agreement dt. 19.11.11 was executed between them. An agreement was also executed on 26.4.12 between the plaintiff and defendant as per which all properties and business in India shall belong to defendant in respect of the share of the plaintiff and the business of Dubai and Sharjah shall belong to the plaintiff. There are several other averments also made by the defendant.
6. On merits, it is denied in the WS that plaintiff is the owner of copyright of literary work as authored by Maulvi Abdul Aziz. That the affidavit dt. 06.07.89 sworn by Maulvi Abdul Aziz is very much clear. The partnership business in the name of M/s Islamic book Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 3 of 6 Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015 service is denied. It is alleged that M/s Islamic book service is the owner and copyright holder of said literary work and therefore no question arises for the plaintiff to surrender, relinquish and abandon his right. All other averments of the plaint are also denied.
7. In replication, the averments of the WS have been denied and those of the plaint have been reaffirmed.
8. I have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the record.
9. Plaintiff claims to be the owner of the literary work of 'Studies in Islam' Grade I to Grade VII as authored by Maulvi Abdul Aziz and alleges that he constituted a partnership in the name of M/s Islamic Book Service along with the defendant and another brother as partners and the plaintiff consented for the publication, printing and distributer of the said book through the said partnership firm but he never abandoned, relinquished or surrender his said copyrights in favour of the partnership firm or any other person and after the firm was dissolved, he withdrew the consent and permission regarding publishing, printing and distribution of the said book. Plaintiff has made various allegations that defendant is causing infringement and violation of his copyright in the said literary work by publishing, printing, distributing and selling the said literary work. On the other hand, defendant denies all the Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 4 of 6 Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015 allegations stating that M/s Islamic Book Service is the owner of the said literary work.
10. Plaintiff in support of his case has filed copy of the extracts from the register of copyrights for the said literary work showing his name as owner. These documents bear the date 26.05.1992 but it is important to note that defendant has also filed copy of extracts from the Registrar of Copyrights bearing a prior date i.e. 26.11.91 showing M/s Islamic Book Service as owner. Plaintiff has not disputed that 'Studies in Islam' and 'Islamic Taleemat' are two different works. Rather it appears that Studies in Islam is the English translation of the literary work in Urdu ie. Islamic Taleemat. The work Islamic Taleemat stands in the name of Islamic Book Service and therefore any translation of the same would also be under the ownership of the said M/s Islamic Book Service unless otherwise agreed. There is no agreement filed by the plaintiff to that effect. Plaintiff has also not filed any document pertaining to the alleged partnership or its dissolution to show that he is the owner of the literary work and had permitted the said partnership to publish, print and distribute the said work. On the other hand, defendant has filed copy of one affidavit of the author Maulvi Abdul Aziz which states that he being author assigns copyrights in the said literary work unconditionally to M/s Islamic Book Service for a consideration of Rs. 50,000/- and that he has been left with no interest and title in the said work. Also the registration in the name Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 5 of 6 Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015 of M/s Islamic Book Service is prior in time. Plaintiff has not pleaded anything in his replication to displace or rebut these registration certificates. These things together give a prima facie case in favour of the defendant. It is also noted that the plaintiff himself states that M/s Islamic Book Pvt. Ltd. is a company, but despite that he has not impleaded the said company, being a separate legal entity, in the present suit and it appears that he has impleaded only the defendant just for the reason that he is the Director in the said company. Further, the relief sought in the plaint as well as in the present application do not name the distributors, book sellers, stockists etc. against whom injunction has been sought. There is also no balance of convenience seen in favour of the plaintiff. Plaintiff has also not disclosed what irreparable, which cannot be compensated in terms of money, would be caused in case injunction is not granted.
11. In view of the above discussion, the application u/o XXXIX rule 1 and 2 CPC filed on 01.11.13 is dismissed.
Announced in open Court (PRANJAL ANEJA)
on 30.04.2015 CIVIL JUDGE-06, CENTRAL
THC/DELHI/30.04.2015
Suit. No. 706/14 Page No. 6 of 6
Abdul Moin V. Abdus Sami On 30th April, 2015