ORIENT LONGMAN LIMITED Vs. INDERJEET ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This present appeal arises out of the Judgment and Order dated May 7, 2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi, in Suit No. 196/2003 dismissing the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff seeking permanent injunction against the respondents/defendants. The suit was filed by the appellant as against the respondents herein alleging violation of the copyright of the appellant in respect of the book 'GUL MOHAR Graded English Course Reader 1'. It was alleged in the plaint by the appellant that the said appellant owned the copyright of the book 'Gul Mohar Graded English Course Reader 1' and had the exclusive right to publish the work in accordance with Section 14(1) (a) of the Copyright Act, 1957.

(2.) The aforesaid suit, however, was proceeded ex parte as the respondents/defendants failed to contest the suit after filing the written statement. The appellant/plaintiff led ex parte evidence on completion of which the learned trial Court dismissed the suit holding that no document has been proved on record by the plaintiff which could satisfactorily prove that the loose sheets which were recovered from the premises of the defendants violated copyright. It was also held that even otherwise the loose sheets could not be said to be a part of the book and, therefore, until and unless the sheets are printed or published by anybody in the form of a book there could not be any occasion for violation of the copyright.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has vehemently challenged the aforesaid findings recorded by the learned trial Court contending inter alia that the said findings are illegal and cannot be sustained in view of the provisions of Section 14 of the Copyright Act. It was also submitted by him that the appellant has several assignments of copyrights in relation to several books including the book 'GUL MOHAR Graded English Course Reader III' and that the assignment deeds of copyrights in such books are available with the appellant. It is contended that by a bona fide error a wrong assignment deed relating to another GUL MOHAR book was filed in place of the assignment deed relevant to the present case. It has been submitted that although an assignment deed was available with the plaintiff the same could not be filed in the trial Court in accordance with law, and the appellant sought to bring it on record by filing a review application which, however, was not allowed. The said review application was dismissed by Judgment and order dated July 24, 2004.