FORT WILLIAM COMPANY LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT -

(2.) HOW far law protects creative aesthetic expression of an artist 7 Is the intellectual property of an artist governed by the game norms as commercial property ? Where does the freedom (of expression) of the autnor and, where does the Director begin ? What is the scope and width of section 57 of the Copyright Act, 1957? These are the questions raised in Mannu Bhandari's suit against M/s. Kala Vikas Pictures (Pvt.) Ltd. and its producer and director. Kala Vikas has produced motion picture 'Samay Ki Dhara' under assignment of filming rights of her novel 'Aap Ka Bunty.' Her complaint is of the multilation and distortion of the novel. She pleads for permanent injunction against its screening and exhibition. Although many authors complain of sueh distortions, few have sought judicial protection. Hence, there is no precedent of any law court to guide the film industry.

(3.) COUNSEL for the respondents submits that the restraint order in the nature of injunction under section 57 can be passed when there is only literary reproduction. If the said novel is published with impermissible changes the publisher can be restrained but where the film is produced based on the novel, no restraint order can be passed under section 57. I do not agree. Section 57 is a special provision for the protection of the special rights of the authors. The object of the section is to put the intellectual property on a higher footing than the normal objects of copyright. The language of section 57 is of widest amplitude. It cannot be restricted to literary' expression only. Visual and audio manifestations are directly covered.