SARASWATI MUSIC COLLEGE Vs. ANNAPOORNA ADVERTISING PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this suit brought by the plaintiff against the defendant for the grant of permanent injunction seeking to restrain the latter from committing bread! of the agreement dated 15.6.1984 as also from organisation, managing and performing music concert by overseas music group known as BONEY-M GROUP at various places in India including Delhi, the plantiff has moved the application under order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code for the grant of a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from performing the musical concerts of BONEY-M till the disposal of the suit. Deft. No. M/s Annapooroa Pvt. Ltd., Bombay through Ravi lyer are the managers of the plaintiff appointed as such vide agreement dated 15.6.1984 for the purpose of organising and conducting the music to be performed by BONEY-M-GROUP at Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Ahmedabad, Madras, Goa and Bangalore, for consideration. Defendart No. 3 Barrucci Leisure Enterprises Ltd., London through Bryan Milter Director International Promotions are the managers of BONEY-M-GROUP. The members of BONY- M-GROUP consists of defendants 4 to 1/. It is asserted that the plaintiff had entered into an agreement through defendant No 1 Ravi Iyer with BONEY-M-GROUP through its manager defendant No. 3 Bryan Miller where by BONEY-M-GROUP was to perform music concerts at various places in India during Nov. 1984 but which programme could not be carried out due to the unforeseen death of Mrs. Indira Gandhi and the programme had to be postponed. Subsequently vide letter dated 17.7.1984 deft. 3 manager of BONEY- M-GROUP informed the plaintiff by way of confirmation that BONEY-M-GROUP would undertake the concert tour of India from 19.10.1984 to 20.11.1984. Another letter (undated) was received by the plaintiff from deft. 3 manager of BONEY-M-GROUP that the tour would be undertaken by BONEY-M- GROUP from 15.3.1985 onwards pursuant to contract and that according to the tour programme Delhi show would be held on 16.3.1985 and at other places during March and April 1985. Thereafter vide letter dated 5.12.1985 BONEY M-GROUP through its Manager defendant No. 3 informed the plaintiff that they would be fixing some dates for holding musical performances in Feb. 1986 whereafter defendant No. 1 manager of plaintiff informed vide letter dated 7.12.1985 that BONEY-M- GROUP had tentatively agreed to come to India between 26.1.1986 to 15.2.1986 for musical performances and for the first time in this letter defendant No. 1 further called upon the plaintiff to arrange for the requisite bank guaiantee at the earliest assuring further that the bank guarantee could be released on the arrival of the troupe in India. It is asserted that on the receipt of this letter the plaintiff informed its manager defendant No. 1 to organise the tour in accordance with the contract dated 15.6.1984 entered into between the plaintiff on the one hand and its manager defendant No.1 on the other, pointing out that there was no provision for any bank guarantee in the aforesaid agreement dated 15.6.1984 and further that there was no purpose of giving any such bank guarantee.

(2.) The plaintiff has also asserted that vide letter dated 11.1.1984 the Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India had granted permission to the plaintiff to organise the performance of the musical concerts through BONEY-M-GROUP subject to certain conditions. The Reserve Bank of India had also vide letter dated 8.10.1984 granted permission to plaintiffs for playing local hospitality and granted exchange of Rs. 16 lacs to the plaintiff for hosting the musical concert through BONEY-M-GROUP.

(3.) The plaintiff has alleged to have incurred huge expenses in lacs of rupees by going personally at various places abroad & in India and further that Ravi lyer of defend No. 1 (manager of the plaintiff) had also similarly visited various places abroad and in India on behalf of the plaintiff and further that the BONEY-M-GROUP technicians had come to India in October 1985 and were made to stay in Hotel Hyatt Regency, New Delhi at the expense of the plaintiff who also met their expenses for their stay at other places. Huge amount is also alleged to have been spent by the plaintiff in lacs of rupees in publicity abroad.