LAWS(MAD)-2009-9-252

EMGEEYAR PICTURES PVT LTD Vs. O K FILMS

Decided On September 15, 2009
EMGEEYAR PICTURES PVT. LTD. Appellant
V/S
O.K. FILMS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals challenge a common order of the learned Single Judge of this Court made in O.A. No. 48 of 2009 in C.S. No. 1101 of 2008 and in O.A. No. 1231 of 2008 in C.S. No. 1100/2008 dismissing the said applications.

(2.) The Court heard the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, the learned Counsel for the first respondent and also the learned Senior Counsel for the second respondent.

(3.) Pending the suit in C.S. No. 1100/2008 the appellant/plaintiff filed O.A. No. 1231/2008 for temporary injunction to restrain the sole defendant from dealing with the negative rights of the three Tamil feature films (1) Nadodi Mannan (2) Adimai Penn and (3) Ulagam Sutrum Valiban including all and every copyright viz., 16mm and TV rights, etc., for entire world and in any other dimension or in any other manner, while the appellant has filed O.A. No. 48/2009 an application for temporary injunction against the defendants therein in C.S. No. 1101/2008 whereby he sought a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants therein from dealing with the negative rights of the above said three feature films including all and every copyright viz., entire copyright, world negative right, sole exclusive and absolute ownership right, distribution, exhibition and exploitation right in 35mm, 70mm, cinemascope and all other dimensions, through out the world, world satellite rights, audio rights, CD, LCD, DVD, VCD, cable TV rights, pay channel right, dish antenna rights, world high seas rights, world overseas TV rights, air born rights, DTH rights, paper view rights, video on demand rights, VHS rights, pay Television rights, satellite pay television rights, direct to User (DTU) rights, laser disc, multimedia rights, cable TV, internet right etc., for entire world and in any other dimension or in any other manner. A counter was filed. The learned Single Judge on scrutiny of the available materials and hearing the submissions made, dismissed both the applications. Hence these appeals have arisen at the instance of the appellant/plaintiff.