M/S. ASIANET COMMUNICATIONS LTD., REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT, MR. PREM MENON Vs. SUN T.V. NETWORK LIMITED REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. KALANIDHI MARAN (AMENDED AS PER ORDER DT:04.11.2015 IN APPL. NO. 6859 OF 2015)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.S. No. 47 of 2001 has been filed by Asianet Communications Limited, against Sun T.V. and two others seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner infringing the Plaintiff's copyright in respect of the exclusive satellite television telecast rights of the Malayam feature film 'AHAM' in whole or reproduction of any part thereto, by exploitation for public or private viewing by broadcasting on the first defendant's channel or on any other channel satellite telecast a direction to the first defendant to pay to the plaintiff damages in a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realisation and for costs. C.S.No.66 of 2001 has been filed by Sun T.V. Network Limited, hereinafter referred as 'Sun T.V.' for brevity against the Asianet Communications Ltd., (hereinafter 'Asianet' for brevity) and another seeking for a declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to the copyright in respect of the picture 'AHAM' through Satellite Television and for a permanent injunction from in any manner infringing their copyright in the first defendant's channel or in any other channel and to direct the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the costs of this Suit and for other reliefs.

(2.) The brief averments made in the plaint are as follows :

(3.) While so, the first defendant (Sun T.V.) had made an advertisement on 23.07.2000 in 'THE HINDU' a leading newspaper that the said film would be telecast on the said date in 'SURYA TV' (A channel owned and controlled by the first defendant). Thereafter, the second defendant had issued a notice to the first defendant on 14.10.2000 calling for an explanation as how the said feature film was telecast in SURYA TV without obtaining any right from the original owner. Even before issuance of such notice, the second defendant had sent a letter to the first defendant containing the details of list of feature films in which the rights were vested in them. It is the further case of Asianet that the first defendant had acquired the right of telecasting the feature film from the third defendant who has got no right over the same. Hence, the plaintiff has preferred the present suit.