SUDHEESH KUMAR Vs. T.S. JAYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An action alleging literary piracy has been brought before the District Court, Ernakulam, in the form of a suit for injunction, by the appellant herein as plaintiff. The interlocutory application seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondents herein from committing the alleged literary piracy, by way of making a film titled "Garbhasreeman", stands dismissed through the impugned order. The case of the appellant is that somewhere in 2008, he wrote a story and prepared the script for a movie under the caption "Garbhasreeman", and the gist and idea behind the story belong exclusively to the appellant. He prepared the script in its entirety. In the year 2008 itself, the appellant had self registered the gist of the story by putting it in a sealed cover and sending it to his own address through registered post. The 3rd respondent herein is a friend of the appellant. The 4th respondent is a friend of the 3rd respondent. The appellant has no acquaintance with the 4th respondent. The 1st respondent is a Producer and the 2nd respondent is a Director. During the writing of the story and script itself, the appellant had made discussions with the 3rd respondent about the story, as he wanted to get himself introduced to the Directors and Producers for enabling him to have a discussion for cinematographing the story. The 3rd respondent, therefore, was well aware of the story written and the script prepared by the appellant. On many occasions, the appellant had read over and explained the story and script to many producers, leading actors and directors. They all, for some reasons, postponed the acceptance of the story for their film. While so, the appellant came to know from a cinema weekly, named "Vellinakshathram" dated 01/12/2013 that a film titled "Garbhasreeman" is going to be produced by the 1st respondent under the directorship of the 2nd respondent allegedly based on the main story written by the 3rd respondent. Immediately, he contacted respondents 2 and 3 and also the main actor in the proposed film and explained to them about his authorship of the story "Garbhasreeman". As it has come out that the 2nd respondent is going ahead with the film, the appellant made a complaint to the General Secretary of 'FEFKA' on 09/12/2013 pointing out the aforesaid facts. Since the appellant is not a member of 'FEFKA' they were unable to take action on the complaint of the appellant. The appellant could reliably learn that the respondents are making the film "Garbhasreeman" with some slight variations only from the story and script written by the appellant. The major portion of the story is a replica of the story and script written and prepared by the appellant. The actions of the respondents are nothing but clear literary piracy, and as the respondents have proceeded with the making of the film by overlooking the genuine objections of the appellant, the suit before the Court below was filed by the appellant by reserving his right to initiate actions for damages.

(2.) The 2nd respondent filed a counter for himself, and for and on behalf of the 4th respondent, contending inter alia as follows: The 3rd respondent is a known story and script writer and his works were published in magazines and weekly. He is a friend of the 2nd respondent. The petitioner is not a script writer, whereas, he was an Assistant Director very long back. The 2nd respondent had severed connections with him, after the petitioner becoming accused in the case in connection with the murder of his father. The 3rd respondent gave him an idea regarding a man becoming pregnant. There is a story in Puranas regarding a member of a royal family who had married seven women, had still failed to get a child. At the demand of his wife he approached a Sage who gave him holy water to be consumed by his wives. At some point, he consumed the holy water as he became thirsty, thereby he became pregnant and his stomach had to be cut to take out the kid. With the same idea and that provided by the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent and the 4th respondent on obtaining the medical opinion, sat together and framed, designed and developed the story in a humorous way. The 4th respondent in his own handwork prepared the script of "Garbhasreeman".

(3.) The story narrated by the petitioner as "Garbhasreeman" is not connected with the story of "Garbhasreeman" produced by respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 2 and 4 had approached the 1st respondent and he agreed to produce the film. Pooja ceremony was conducted on 05/02/2014, synopsis of the story had been given in 'Vellinakshathram' daily and the shooting of the film has been completed. There can be no copyright in an idea. The characters, relations, scenes, climax and story of the respondents' film are entirely different from the story claimed by the petitioner. They have not infringed any copyright of the petitioner. The 1st respondent had spent lakhs of rupees for making the film and the same is now ripe for release. By the release of the film no substantial injury will be caused to the petitioner. The petitioner has no prima facie case. The balance of convenience is in favour of the respondents. The IA has been filed with ulterior motives.