RDB AND COMPANY Vs. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claim to be the owners of the copyright in ten cinematograph films on the basis of the father of the second petitioner, R.D. Bansal, being the producer of a few of the said films. The petitioners claim exclusive rights on the basis of such ownership to sell the said films or give them on commercial rental for the purpose of being shown to the public.

(2.) The complaint in the suit is against the respondents, primarily the respondent no.1, for telecasting the films in Bangladesh on its OTT platform Zee5, which, according to the petitioners, is in breach of the express terms and conditions of two agreements. By the first agreement, dated 4th July, 2017, the first petitioner RDB and Company (HUF) licensed the right to telecast the ten films to the third petitioner Turtle In-Motion Studios through the media of TV and Indian satellite channels within the territory of India, excluding Lok Sabha TV and Doordarshan channels. By a second licence agreement dated 21st December, 2017, Turtle granted licence to the second respondent (Balarka Projects) to telecast the ten films in television and satellite channels excluding Doordarshan channels. The grievance of the petitioners is telecast of the films by the respondent no.1 ZEE Entertainment on satellite channels and OTT platform, namely, Zee5 in Bangladesh in breach of the terms of the licence. The petitioners claim to have put ZEE on notice by a letter dated 1st June, 2021 complaining against such telecast. Turtle also intimated Balarka that the latter has committed breach of the covenants in the licence whereupon the said licence has been reduced null and void with immediate effect and that Balarka ceased to have any rights in respect of the said films through itself or through ZEE.

(3.) According to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, ZEE and Balarka have breached the terms of the licence in the following manner: (a) the petitioners have not been informed of the further licence granted by Balarka in favour of ZEE, (b) ZEE has telecast the films on its OTT platform Zee5 and (c) the films have been telecast outside India, namely, in Bangladesh. Counsel relies on Ss. 17(c) and 55 of The Copyright Act, 1957 for claiming copyright in the cinematograph films and for contending that the petitioners are entitled to civil remedies for infringement of copyright, respectively.