JEEVANANDHAM Vs. V.GOWTHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suit has been filed for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants and their men from, in any manner infringing the copyright of the plaintiff of the story, screen play, dialogues etc. of the Tamil film "'Mahizhchi'"? written by the 1st defendant for the plaintiff, by producing, distributing, processing the film prints or releasing/ screening the said film directed by the 1st defendant on behalf of the 2nd defendant or any other person and for costs.

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the plaintiff is as follows : 2.1. The case of the plaintiff is that they are carrying on business in film productions. The first defendant informed the plaintiff that he was having a subject and requested the plaintiff to take up production of the film and also stated that he would write a story, screen play, dialogues etc. for the plaintiff on the basis of the story-line of a novel 'Thalaimuraigal' which was written by one Neela Padmanaban and also offered to direct the said film. The plaintiff agreed to produce the said film and the first defendant agreed to write the screen play, dialogue etc. for the film which was named 'Mahizhchi'. The defendant's letter dated 26.01.2004 confirmed the opportunity which was given to him by the plaintiff. On the assurance of the first defendant, the plaintiff registered the name of the film titled as 'Mahizhchi' with the Tamil Film Producers' Council on 19.01.2005 and an agreement was entered into between the plaintiff and the first defendant on 10.03.2005 under which the first defendant agreed and undertook to write the story, screen play, dialogue, etc. on the basis of the story written by Neela Padmanaban. The plaintiff has given a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the first defendant for the said contract. It was further agreed that in the event of the project being a commercially viable project, the first defendant would be entitled to 40% share of other language rights. The plaintiff paid a further sum of Rs.25,000/- to one Aditya Sundaresh, a relative of the said Neel Padmanabhan on behalf of Mr.Neela Padmanabhan towards the advance payment for the said novel 'Thalaimuraigal'.

(3.) Brief contention of the written statement is as follows : Both the defendants filed the written statement to the effect that the plaintiff has no copy right over the story play of the film 'Mahizhchi' as on the date of filing of the suit. As a matter of fact, the plaintiff and the first defendant entered into an agreement dated 10.03.2005 whereunder the first defendant had agreed to direct the film based on the story of Neela Padmanaban. The first defendant has obtained copyright of the story of Neela Padmanaban and written the screen play and dialogue for the film 'Mahizhchi' and directed the same as cinematographic film. Subsequently, on 08.01.2006, the plaintiff has relinquished his right over the story, screen play and dialogue created by the first defendant under the title 'Magizchi' on an agreed compensation. Therefore, the copy right over the film has been relinquished in favour of first defendant under the said letter of arrangement dated 18.01.2006. From 18.01.2006, the first defendant is the absolute copy right owner of the screen play of the movie titled 'Mahizhchi'. Further, the plaintiff failed to claim the compensation as agreed between the plaintiff and the defendants under the letter dated 18.01.2006 within 3 years from the date of 18.01.2006. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to claim any compensation. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.