Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

M/S. Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. ... vs Sky Cable Network on 30 October, 2018

           IN THE COURT OF SHRI M. P. SINGH
        ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE­03 (CENTRAL),
               TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI


  TM No. 03/18
  New TM No. 1/18

  M/s. Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd.
  E­2/16, White House, Ansari Road,
  Daryaganj, New Delhi­110002.              ..............Plaintiff

                                 VERSUS

  SKY Cable Network
  3rd Floor, About Bank of Maharashtra
  Gopal Char Rasta, Anand - 388001, Gujarat. .......Defendant

    SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION RESTRAINING
       INFRINGEMNT OF COPYRIGHT, MANDATORY
   INJUNCTION, DAMAGES & RENDITION OF ACCOUNTS


  Date of Institution of Suit      :                                                   02.01.2018
  Date of pronouncement of judgment:                                                   30.10.2018


                               JUDGMENT

1. The Plaintiff, a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, through its authorized representative has filed the present suit for permanent injunction for restraining infringement   of   copyright,   mandatory   injunction,   damages and for rendition of accounts against the defendant.

2. Enumerated in brief the facts of the case of the plaintiff are as follows: Plaintiff is one of India's largest and most reputed music   companies.   Plaintiff   and   its   label  'T­Series'  is   highly TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 1 of 11 regarded and considered as one of the top names in the film and  music industry. Plaintiff has significantly expanded its music business to include production and marketing of video cassettes, compact discs (CDs) both blank and pre­recorded, Television sets, Two in one, Tape recorders, CD Players etc all   sold   under   the   brand  'T­Series'.   Plaintiff   has   made   a significant contribution to the cultural wealth of the country by  giving  opportunities  to new  artists  and  performers on  a scale which did not exist before and by widening the range of quality music and audio visual entertainment available to the general   public   at   affordable   price.   Plaintiff   has   launched and   /or   promoted   some   of   the   biggest   and   most   talented names   in   the   music   and   film   industry   including   Anuradha Paudwal, Sonu Nigam, Udit Narayan, Kumar Sanu, Abhijit, Hansraj   Hans,   Harbhajan   Mann,   Adnan   Sami,   Sadhna Sargam,  Bela  Sulakhe,  Surjit   Bindrakhiya,  Satvinder   Bitti, Bhagawant Mann, Shankar Sawhney, Kumar Nishu, Guddu Rangila,   Manoj   Tiwari,   Bharat   Sharma   Vyas,   Madan   Rai, Kalpana   Potwariya,   Radheyshyam   Rasia,   Amrita   Virk   and Babbu Mann etc.

3. Plaintiff has also launched and/or promoted many song writers, music directors and video Directors such as Samir, Durga,   Vinay   Bihari,   Nikhil   Vinay,   Dabbu   Malik,   Harry Anand   etc.   In   addition,   plaintiff   has   also   launched   and/or promoted   film   and   video   artistes   such   as   Priyanshu, Himanshu, Sandilli, Shefali Jariwala and Sanober Kabir. 

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 2 of 11

4. Plaintiff acquires copyright in all literary, musical and other   works   which   it   commissions   and   manages   by   way   of assignments from the authors and /or other prior owners of copyright in the same. As on date, plaintiff's label T­Series has   over   20,000   Hindi   film   and   non­films   songs   as   well   as more than 50,000 songs in regional languages to its credit. This vast repertoire adds up to tens of thousands of hours of invaluable music. Plaintiff, inter alia, owns copyrights in the songs. Plaintiff's repertoire is easily identified by the public, since all the CDs/ DVDs/VCDs prominently display the logo of the   plaintiff's   label  "T­Series",   each   containing   a   notice brining to the attention of the public at large that the plaintiff has   made   the   sound/video   recording   and   that   the   plaintiff owns the copyright in the said work(s).

5. Plaintiff has robust and well defined business licensing policy   enabling   3rd  party   organizations,   including   television broadcasting   organization,   FM   Radio   Channels   and   Cable Television Operators to apply for and obtain licence for use of its   copyrighted   works   comprising   of   cinematographic   films, sound   recordings   and   underlying   musical   and/   or   literary works.   Plaintiff   actively   pursues   such   licensing   policy   and licenses   are   routinely   sought   and   granted   by   it   for   its copyrighted work(s) including songs, audio visual recordings etc.   Plaintiff   grants   license   for   even   small   portions/   brief exacts   of   its   works,   depending   on   the   requirement   of   the license and terms of agreement between the parties. Plaintiff has   executed   various   licensing   agreements   with   Television Broadcasting   Organizations   such   Multi   Screen   Media   Pvt.

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 3 of 11

Ltd   for   its   channels   including   Sony   TV,   SAB   TV   etc.;   Star India   Pvt.   Ltd.   for   its   channels   STAR   TV,   STAR   NEWS; Viacom   Media   Pvt.   Ltd.   for   its   channel   Colors;   Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd for its all its network of the channels   including   ZEE   TV   and   ZEE   News.   Plaintiff   also grants licenses to Multi System Operators (MSO) and /Cable Television   Operators   who   operate   their   own   cable   network channels.   M/s   Digital   Entertainment   Network   Pvt.   Ltd. (DEN)  and  Hathway  Network Pvt. Ltd.  amongst   and  other cable operators have licensing agreements with the plaintiff and   have   obtained   licenses   from   the   plaintiff   for   use   of various   copyrighted   works   etc   for   their   Ground   Cable Network. To keep a track of unauthorized infringing users, plaintiff caries out random monitoring of television channels. As   and   when   instances   of   infringements   are   brought   to plaintiff's   notice,   usually,   plaintiff   first   sends   a   notice requiring the operator in question to immediately stop using infringing materials and to obtain a license from it. However, in   case   infringement   continues,   plaintiff   then   proceeds   to avail the legal remedies against the infringing users. Plaintiff has also cited some of the decisions of the Hon'ble High Court, passed   against   the   Multi   System   Operators/Ground   Cable Network   Operators   found   to   be   infringing   the   plaintiff's copyright work in paragraph 17 of the plaint.

6. The defendant, located at Anand, Gujarat  is a Ground Cable   Operator   carrying   on   business   of   providing   cable television services to various subscribers under the name and logo   of  "SKY   MOVIES".    Defendant   on   its   cable   network TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 4 of 11 under the logo of  "SKY MOVIES" provides services such as cable   advertising   and   non­stop   entertainment   wherein   it makes extensive use of Hindi songs and film extracts as also cinematograph films/ movies which are mostly pirated. The defendant is doing so without obtaining a License from the plaintiff. The business model defendant is to enhance viewer­ ship   among   its   subscribers   and   at   the   same   time   increase revenue generated though advertising. Such unlicensed and unauthorized use of the plaintiff's work by defendant on its cable   television   network   amount   to   an   infringement   of   the plaintiff's   copyright,   which   is   causing   enormous   loss   of revenue to the plaintiff and resulting in generation of revenue for the defendant at the expense of plaintiff's statutory rights.

7. It was on 20.07.2017 that plaintiff first came to know that   the   defendant   was   utilizing   and   broadcasting   musical and   audio­visual   works   of   the   plaintiff   to   the   public unauthorizedly   and   without   having   obtained   license   or permission   from   the   plaintiff   to   use   such   works   or communicate   them   to   the   public.   A   recording   of   such infringing   materials   was   made   on   20.07.2017   by   PW­2   Mr. Mohit   Sharma.   The   recording   so   made   by   PW­2   Mohit Sharma   detected   various   instances   of   infringement   by   the defendant on its cable television networks under the logo of "SKY   MOVIES"  of   plaintiff's   works   such   as   song   "Yeh   Jo Halka Halka Suroor Hai" from the film/ movie "Halka Halka"

song   "Love   Me   Thoda   Aur"   from   the   movie   "Yaarian",   the song "Mujhko Barsat Bana Lo" from the movie "Junooniyat", TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 5 of 11 the song "Kabhi Jo Badal Barse" from the movie "Jackpot", the son "Sun Mere Hamsafar" from the movie "Badrinath Ki Dulhaniya"   and   the   song   "Mein   Tere   Ishq   Mein"   from   the movie "Tera Suroor" etc. Said recording shows that defendant through its cable networks as aforesaid is broadcasting audio­ visual   clips   in   which   plaintiff   has   copyright.   Such   works include the songs as mentioned above. A cue sheet was also prepared by PW­2 Mr. Mohit Sharma on the basis of video recordings   clearly   showing   the   songs   played   and   their durations   and   also   whether   such   songs   are   owned   by   the plaintiff or not.

8. It   is   averred   that   such   an   action   of   the   defendant amount   to   infringement   of   copyright   of   the   plaintiff   in   the said songs. Plaintiff then issued a letter dated  24.07.2017  to the defendant thereby informing the latter about its rights in the said works and about the need to obtain license, but it failed to have the desired effect.  Thereafter, plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 04.08.2017 to the defendant, but in vain.  It is alleged that the defendant is continuing to actively infringe the   copyrighted   works   of   plaintiff.   Action   of   defendant   is allegedly   causing   severe   and   irreparable   damage   to   the plaintiff   and   it   is   suffering   direct   loss   on   account   of   non­ payment   of   license   fee   by   the   defendant   for   the   entire duration   during   which   the   defendant   had   broadcast   the plaintiff's   work   in   an   unauthorized   manner.   Thus,   present suit has been filed.

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 6 of 11

9. Summons   of   the   suit   was   served   upon   defendant. Defendant did not appear and neither did it file its written statement. Defendant suffered the proceedings  ex parte  vide order 01.08.2018.

10. In   evidence,   plaintiff   examined   its   Authorized Representative  Sh.   Anil   Maini  as   PW­1   vide   affidavit Ex.PW1/A. PW­1 has relied upon document viz­ (1) Copy of Board   Resolution   is   Ex.PW1/1   (OSR),   (2)   Certificate   of Incorporation is Ex.PW1/2, (3) Copies of orders passed by the Hon'ble High Courts granting an  ex parte  interim injunction against   various   defendants   are   Ex.PW1/3   (Colly.),  (4) Copyright Certificates are Ex.PW1/4 (Colly.) (OSR), (5) DVD containing a recording of the broadcast is Ex.PW1/5, (6) Cue Sheet prepared by Mohit Sharma is Ex.PW1/6, (7) Snapshots along with logo "SKY MOVIES" and Trade Mark/Logo of the plaintiff   company   are   Ex.PW1/7,   (8)   Copy   of   letter   dated 24.07.2017   is   Ex.PW1/8,   (9)   Proof   of   dispatch   is   Ex.PW1/9, (10)   Proof   of   delivery   along   with   remark   "DELIVERED"   is Ex.PW1/10, (11) Legal notice dated 04.08.2017 is Ex.PW1/11, (12)   Proof   of   dispatch   is   Ex.PW1/12,   (13)   The   consignment note   (Proof   of   delivery)   report   of   Internet   delivery   dated 08.08.2017 along   with   the   remark   "DELIVERED"   is Ex.PW1/13.

11. Plaintiff   also   examined   Mr.   Mohit   Sharma   as   PW­2 vide   affidavit   Ex.PW2/A.   PW­2   has   relied   upon   documents already exhibited as Ex.PW1/5, Ex.PW1/6, and Ex.PW1/7.

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 7 of 11

12.  Arguments heard. Record perused. 

13. In the case at hand plaintiff's ex parte evidence remains unrebutted   and   unchallenged.   It   is   established   that   the infringing   activities   of   defendant   continued   unabated   and thus the plaintiff was left with no alternative but to file the present   suit.   The   record   bears   out   that   the   said   infringing broadcasts have been confirmed by PW­2 Mr. Mohit Sharma who   was   able   to   record   such   infringing   broadcasts   on   the defendant's   channel   on   20.07.2017.   Plaintiff   was   able   to detect various instances of infringement by the defendant on programs broadcast on its cable network under the logos of "SKY   MOVIES"  wherein   sound   recordings,   cinematograph plaintiff's repertoire of audio/ video songs were communicated to the public, without the plaintiff's permission or license.

14. It is also proved that the plaintiff company is the owner of copyright of the works broadcast by the defendant on its channels i.e."SKY MOVIES" as detected by PW­2 Mr. Mohit Sharma.   The   copies   of   sample   Assignment   Deeds   which illustrate that the plaintiff company is the exclusive copyright owner of the said works being exploited by the defendant on its   channel   during   the   aforementioned   periods   has   been placed on record.

15. The defendant has, thus, caused the plaintiff company substantial   loss   and   damage   on   account   of   continuous infringement   of   its   copyright   and   the   same   is   disrupting plaintiff's business, which depends partly on license income from   the   use   of   its   copyrighted   works.   It   is   established   on TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 8 of 11 record that the plaintiff invests massive amounts to acquire copyrights from the authors and owner thereof and the same runs into many crores of rupees. It is stated that other media and  entertainment channels which regularly obtain license, the fee runs into several lakhs of rupees. The usage of the plaintiff company's repertoire by the defendant was detected and has been proved; therefore, damages are claimed in the suit.   The   counsel   for   the   plaintiff   has   submitted   that   the damages   claimed   by   the   plaintiff   company   are   nominal   as compared   to   the   license   fees   actually   paid   by   other broadcasting organizations.

16. With regard to the relief of damages as claimed by the plaintiff   Hon'ble   High   Court   in   various   cases   filed   by   the present plaintiff, has previously granted both exemplary and punitive   damages   against   infringers   in  ex   parte  matters   of similar nature.

17. In Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ragany Cable   TV   Pvt.   Ltd.   CS   (COMM)   1222/2016,   dated 22.05.2017, Hon'ble High Court granted damages of Rs. 21 Lakhs. Similar damages were granted in case titled  Super Cassettes   Industries   Ltd.   CS   (OS)   1882/2014,   dated 16.05.2017  and  Super   Cassettes   Industries   Ltd.   Vs   TG Angles India Pvt. Ltd., dated 20.04.2017, by Hon'ble High Court.

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 9 of 11

18.  Accordingly,   in   light   of   the   aforesaid   judgments,   this court is of the opinion that the damages in the present suit be awarded at Rs. 20,00,000/­ (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only).

19. In view of the facts of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that in the present case Rs. 20,00,000/­  (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) as punitive damages be granted in favour of   the   plaintiff   and   against   the   defendant.   It   is   ordered accordingly. 

20. Accordingly, the present suit is decreed as under:­

a) Decree   of   the   permanent   injunction   is   passed   in favour   of   the   plaintiff   and   against   the   defendant thereby   restraining   the   defendant,   their   officers, servants,   agents,   partners   and   representatives   and all other acting for an on   their behalf from either engaging   themselves   or   from   authorizing   the recording,   distributing,   broadcasting,   public performances, communication to the public or in any other way exploiting the cinematograph films, sound recordings   and/or   literary   works   (lyrics)   and musical works (musical composition) or other works or  part  thereof  throughout  India,  that  is   owned by the   plaintiff   including   all   works   whereof   plaintiff has copyright under section 52A of the Copyright Act, 1957;

b) Decree of mandatory injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant directing the defendant to deliver and hand over to the plaintiff or its   authorized   representatives,   all   infringing   tapes, copies   and   negatives   etc   bearing   the   copyrighted materials of the plaintiff;

TM No. 03/18 New TM No. 1/18                                                                      Page No. 10 of 11

c) Decree is also passed in favour of the plaintiff and against   the   defendant   in   sum   of   Rs.   20,00,000/­ (Rupees   Twenty   Lakhs   only)   as   punitive   damages, payable by the defendant to the plaintiff;

d) Cost   of   the   suit   is   also   awarded   in   favour   of   the plaintiff.

21. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the Record Room.

Digitally signed
                                             MURARI                      by MURARI
                                                                         PRASAD SINGH
Announced in the open Court                  PRASAD                      Date:
                                             SINGH                       2018.10.30
On 30.10.2018
                                                                         15:04:35 +0530


                                                     M.P. SINGH
                                                ADJ­03, (CENTRAL)
                                              TIS HAZARI COURTS 
                                                            DELHI




TM No. 03/18
New TM No. 1/18                                                                                           Page No. 11 of 11