RISHI RAJ Vs. INTERNATIONAL FILMS DISTRIBUTORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order would dispose of the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of Code of Civil Procedure I.A.No.7236/2001) seeking for injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant restraining the defendant, its employees, agents and representatives from in any manner interfering in the negative rights, sole and exclusive commercial and non-commercial Video rights in all formats, including CVD DVD, satellite and television rights (both terrestrial and extra terrestrial cable T.V. rights, pay T.V. rights and the available theatrical rights for all India and overseas territories i.e. the entire world including India, in picture 'KOHINOOR', till the disposal of the suit. This order would also dispose of the application of the defendant under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (I.A&8262/2001) seeking for return of the plaint to the plaintiff to be presented in the court having proper jurisdiction.

(2.) The plaintiff is carrying on the business of film distribution, exhibition and exploitation of cinematographic films and is also dealing in satellite right and negative right of cinematographic films. A cinematographic film 'KOHINOOR' was produced by M/s.Republic Films Corporation, which producer was later declared as insolvent and all assets of the said producer were taken over by the Official Assignee of Bombay High Court and thus the entire negative right of the picture KOHINOOR including the negative rights, sole and exclusive commercial and non-commercial video rights in all formats allegedly vest with the Official Assignee of Bombay High Court.

(3.) On 1.6.2000, one M/s. A.G.Exports who were earlier enjoying the said rights made an offer of Rs.75,000.00 to the Official Assignee for acquiring the sole and exclusive rights of the said picture for further ten years from 1/1/2001. Based on the aforesaid offer, the Official Assigned made a similar offer to various people including the plaintiff under letter dt.27.7.2000. In the said letter it was made clear that the distribution rights of the said picture are perpetually held by one M/s. Seth & Sayyed for U.P., Delhi, East Punjab, Code of Civil ProcedureI, Nizam Circuit under agreement dt.24.8.1962 while other rights were available with the Official Assignee which were offered for sale to the plaintiff. The plaintiff participated in the aforesaid bidding held in the office of the Official Assignee on 30.8.2001 and ultimately the plaintiff gave the highest bid of Rs.14,10,000.00, which was accepted by the Official Assignee and a report thereto was submitted by the Official Assignee before the Bombay High Court seeking a direction whether the offer of Rs.14,10,000.00 could be accepted or not When the matter was listed before the Bombay High Court, the said offer of the plaintiff was accepted and thereafter an agreement 20.12.2000 was executed by the Official Assignee in favour of the plaintiff after receipt of the entire amount from the plaintiff. It is also stated that before the said agreement could be executed, the plaintiff received a letter dt.10.10.2000 from the defendant stating that they have also certain rights in the said film. Immediately, on receipt of the aforesaid letter dt.10.10.2001, the plaintiff informed the defendant Under their letter dt.27.10.2000 that as per the information of the plaintiff the defendant has no right nor the defendant has lodged their claim with the Official Assignee when proceedings for insolvency were in progress. In response to the letter of the plaintiff, the defendant furnished a photo copy of the agreement signed by the defendant with the producer and asserted that they were holding rights for overseas excluding India, Burma, Pakistan, Ceylon, Aden, Continent of Africa, Complete Middle East; West Indies, Fiji, U.K. and Greece and alleged that there is an agreement dt.13.10.1961 with M/s.Republic Film Corporation. Accordingly, the present suit was filed seeking an injunction against the defendant from interfering with the rights of the plaintiff. Summons were issued and notice Was issued on the. injunction application, on receipt of which the defendant filed the aforesaid application under Order 7 Rule 10 Code of Civil Procedure contending, inter alia that the agreement of the defendant with the original purchaser of the movie dt:13.10.1961, contains a clause providing that in the event of any dispute arising out of or in connection with the aforesaid agreement, the same shall have to be decided by arbitration under the Arbitration Act. It was also submitted that the plaintiff is claiming the alleged rights in respect of the said picture from the Original Assignee under agreement dt.20.12.2000, which provides that only the Courts in Bombay will have the Jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Relevant clause 9 of the said agreement, which is relied upon by the defendant, provides that in case of any dispute or Interpretation of the memorandum of agreement dt.20.12.2000 the same would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Hon'ble the Insolvency Court of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay alone. Accordingly, it was submitted by the counsel appearing for the defendant that the Delhi courts shall have no jurisdiction and that the subject matter of the suit is required to be adjudicated upon through the process of arbitration and therefore, the plaint Is to be returned to the in view of the aforesaid position, I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties on the issue of grant of an interim injunction as prayed for and also on the issue of return of plaint terms of the provisions of Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The contention of the defendant is that their right in the picture KOHINOOR is based on the agreement executed in favour of the defendant by M/s.Republic Films Corporation, Bombay, on 13.10.1961. By the aforesaid agreement, the defendant was given the right of distribution, exploitation and exhibition rights of the said picture KOHINOOR for certain overseas territories, namely, complete overseas excluding India, Burma, Pakistan, Ceylon, Aden, Continent of Africa, Complete Middle East, Complete Fareast, West Indies, Fiji, U.K. and Greece. The same is mentioned at the top of the aforesaid agreement a copy of which is placed on record. If a dispute arises in respect of the same with regard to rights of the defendant excluding the aforesaid areas, the defendant could possibly seek for reference of such dispute to arbitrator. However here is a case, where the original purchaser, namely, M/s.Republic Film Corporation was declared insolvent and all assets of the.said producer were taken over by the Official Assignee of the Bombay High Court. The Official Assignee called for offers in acquiring the negative rights, sole and exclusive commercial and non-commercial video rights'in all formats including CVD, DVD, satellite and television rights, cable T.V. rights, Pay T.V. rights and the available theatrical right of the said picture for India and overseas territories i.e the entire world including India for ten years commencing on 1/1/2000 of the picture KOHINOOR in black and white produced by the insolvent under the banner of M/s.Republic Films Corporation. The Official Assignee sold the said rights for a period of ten years to the plaintiff, who was the highest bidder and the aforesaid bid of the plaintiff was also approved by the Bombay High Court. It further transpires from the records that before the aforesaid bid was approved by the Bombay High Court, the defendant informed the Official Assignee about the Agreement of the defendant with the original producer, upon which the Official Assignee directed the defendant to represent; their case before the Bombay High Court. It transpires from the proceedings of the Bombay High Court that the defendant was represented before the Bombay High Court in the aforesaid proceedings. The order of the Bombay High Courts which is placed on record, discloses that the Official Assigned submitted the report that the offer of Rs.14,10,000.00 given to the Official Assignee in the auction sale dt.30.8.2000 by the plaintiff for acquiring the negative rights etc. including the sale of commercial and non-commercial video rights in all formats was a good offer and, thereafter the said offer was approved by the Bombay High Court.