Calcutta High Court
Vodafone Idea Limited vs Saregama India Limited & Anr on 8 July, 2019
Author: Arindam Sinha
Bench: Arindam Sinha
ORDER SHEET
GA No.1068 of 2018
With
CS No.23 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED.
Versus
SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITED & ANR.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
Date: 8th July, 2019.
Appearance:
Mr. Anindya Kumar Mitra Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhrajit Mitra Sr. Adv.
Mr. Soumya Ray Chowdhury, Adv.
Mr. Sarosij Dasgupta, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Bagh, Adv.
Ms. Mudrika Khaitan, Adv.
Mr. Ritesh Ganguly, Adv.
Mr. Surajit Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Saumabho Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Deepan Sarkar, Adv.
Mr. Ayush Jain, Adv.
Ms. Ashika Daga, Adv.
Ms. Adreeka Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Debnath Dey, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Dey, Adv.
The Court: Mr. Anindya Mitra, learned senior advocate submits, there was suppression of material fact. Annex agreement dated 16th June, 2016 between plaintiff and defendant no.1 had in it clause 13, which says plaintiff may be required to procure licences from any copyright society/organization operating in any part of the territory during the term as sole responsibility of it, at its cost. This fact came to 2 be disclosed in affidavit in opposition of defendant no.1. He relies on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Barbara Taylor Bradford versus Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd., reported in (2004) 1 CHN 448, to, inter alia, paragraphs 224 and 225.
He reiterates provisions for assignment of copyright provided in section 18, particularly third and fourth provisos under sub-section (1) regarding authors as not having waived. He also draws attention to section 60 and submits, this suit is not one under that provision. There can be no dispute that his client's assertion of rights of its members, being authors of literary and musical works, are grounded in the authors being such. No case of his client's assertions being groundless has been made out in the suit. That would make this suit an interpleader suit, as such has been relied upon by plaintiff and, he reiterates his submissions regarding interpleader suit. He refers to interim order dated 1st October obtained behind the back of his client. He submits, writ of summons has not yet been served on his client calling for counter claim by written statement but, it prevented from moving by invoking both civil and criminal jurisdiction of Courts on remedy available under the Act. He presses for early adjudication of this application and concludes his submissions.
Ms. Adreeka Pandey, learned advocate appears on behalf of defendant no.1 and prays for adjournment on submission, talks of settlement are going on between her client and plaintiff. Mr. Mitra opposes prayer for adjournment.
List on 15th July, 2019.
(ARINDAM SINHA, J.) sp/