RAMESH SIPPY Vs. SHAAN RANJEET UTTAMSINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent, the appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the stage of admission. This appeal is directed against an order dated 1st April 2013 of the learned Single Judge declining ad -interim reliefs to the appellant.

(2.) THE appellant is a film director. He has to his credit several Hindi films. The most notable of these is Sholay. He has also directed other Hindi films including Sagar, Shaan, Seeta aur Geeta and Andaaz. In his Suit, the appellant claims to be the "author" of and the "first owner of copyright" in these films. He also claims to be entitled to "Author's Special Rights" in these films. The appellant claims that the respondents have infringed these rights of the appellant and seeks protective orders in relation to these rights. For the purposes of the present appeal, we are principally concerned with the film Sholay. This is also the focus of the judgment under appeal. We have, therefore, in this judgment referred only to that film and only note that the appellant has sought some reliefs in respect of the other films. In his Notice of Motion in which the impugned ad -interim order was passed, the appellant sought injunction restraining the respondents from alienating, encumbering, disposing of or creating any interests in these films; and, in particular, by prayer (c) of the Notice of Motion, from releasing the 3 -D version of Sholay. It is the imminent release of the 3 -D version of Sholay that is of pressing concern to the Plaintiff.

(3.) RESPONDENTS No. 1 and 2 are brothers. They are the sons of the appellant's late sister one Soni Uttamsing. The 3rd respondent is the appellant's nephew, the son of the appellant's brother Vijay Sippy. Respondents No. 1 and 3 are directors of the 5th respondent. Respondent No. 4, Sippy Films Private Limited ("SFPL"), is a company that claims to have gifted the copyright in Sholay to the 5th respondent, Sholay Media & Entertainment Private Limited ("SMEPL"). This is, in turn, a private limited company said to be wholly controlled by the 1st and 3rd respondents. SMEPL claims to own the copyright in Sholay. Respondent No. 6 is also a private limited company. It is said to be controlled by the 2nd respondent, and to have the rights to broadcast the other four films directed by the appellant. The 8th respondent, Jayantilal Gada ("Gada") controls 7th respondent, Pen India Pvt. Ltd. ("PIPL"), and PIPL is said to have obtained the rights to make and distribute a 3 -D version of Sholay. Finally, the 9th respondent, Maya Digital Studios Pvt. Ltd. ("Maya Digital") is the company that has converted Sholay into a 3 -D version.