Scribd
Upload
271 views2 pages

Copyright Suit Dismissal

The Supreme Court of India dismissed a special leave petition filed by M/s. Mac Charles (I) Ltd. against M/s. Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. The Court found no infirmity in the High Court's order refusing to stay proceedings of a copyright infringement suit filed by the respondent. The Court held that under Section 60 of the Copyright Act, a suit cannot be held not maintainable if the claimant files an infringement suit with due diligence. Once such a suit is filed, Section 60 ceases to apply.

Uploaded by

Ashish Kankal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
271 views2 pages

Copyright Suit Dismissal

The Supreme Court of India dismissed a special leave petition filed by M/s. Mac Charles (I) Ltd. against M/s. Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. The Court found no infirmity in the High Court's order refusing to stay proceedings of a copyright infringement suit filed by the respondent. The Court held that under Section 60 of the Copyright Act, a suit cannot be held not maintainable if the claimant files an infringement suit with due diligence. Once such a suit is filed, Section 60 ceases to apply.

Uploaded by

Ashish Kankal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

"

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 39994 OF 2012

M/S. MAC CHARLES (I) LTD. Petitioner

VERSUS

M/[Link] PERFORMING RIGHTS SOCIETY LTD. Respondent

O R D E R

In view of the proviso to Section 60 of the Copyright Act,


1957 specifically enumerating that "this Section shall not apply if
the person making such threats, with due diligence, commences and
prosecutes an action for infringement of the copyright claimed by
him" the suit filed by the respondents in the Delhi High Court
cannot be held as not maintainable.
The judgment and order in the matter of "Super Cassette
Industries Ltd. Vs Bathla Cassettes India (P) Ltd., AIR 1994 Del
237, has further clarified the proviso which makes the position
clear that this Section will have no application if a person who
has made such threats commences and prosecutes with due diligence
an action for infringement of the copyright claimed by him. Once a
suit is filed for infringmenet of the copyright by the person who
has given the threat, the suit under Section 60 becomes infructuous
as the Section ceases to apply in such a situation.
In view of the aforesaid provision, the High Court has
refused to stay further proceedings of the suit instituted by the
respondents who is alleged to have given threat to the petitioner.

We find no infirmity in the impugned judgement and order


for the reasons indicated hereinbefore. The special leave
petition, therefore, is dismissed.

........................J.
(GYAN SUDHA MISRA)

........................J.
(PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)

NEW DELHI
SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
ITEM NO.61 COURT NO.12 SECTION XIV

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).39994/2012

(From the judgement and order dated 04/10/2012 in CS No.700/2011, IA


No.8165/2011 of The HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)

M/S. MAC CHARLES (I) LTD. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

M/[Link] PERFORMING [Link]. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for permission to place addl. documents on record and prayer
for interim relief and office report)

Date: 30/09/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE

For Petitioner(s) Mr. B.S. Satyanand, Adv.


Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, [Link].


Mr. Hari Shankar K, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Verma, Adv.
Mr. Raunaq Kamath, Adv.
Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi, Adv.
Mr. Prasanna, Adv.
Ms. Tanvi Misra, Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following


O R D E R

The special leave petition is dismissed in terms of the


signed order.

(NAVEEN KUMAR) (S.S.R. KRISHNA)


COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)

You might also like