Bombay High Court Dismisses Section 9 Petition for Injunction Against Film Release Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence. Petitioner failed to establish existence of arbitration agreement or any agreement with respondent regarding script/story.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 103
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Mr. Prem Mohanlal Girdhani, filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim relief to restrain the respondent, M/s. Percept Picture, from releasing the film 'KAMAAL DHAMAAL MALAMAAL' scheduled for release on 28th September 2012. The petitioner claimed that he had registered a script/story titled 'TERE CHAKKAR MEIN' with the Writers' Association in 2008, and that the respondent's film was based on a similar story without his permission. He alleged that there was an arbitration agreement permitting him to lodge complaints with the Writers' Association and IMPPA, and that he had filed complaints on 8th and 11th September 2012, but the committees were not available for adjudication. The court noted that the petitioner failed to produce any document evidencing the alleged arbitration agreement or any agreement with the respondent regarding the script. The court held that without a prima facie case and without establishing the existence of an arbitration agreement, no interim relief could be granted under Section 9. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Arbitration - Interim Relief under Section 9 - Prima Facie Case - The petitioner sought injunction against release of film alleging copyright infringement of his registered script, but failed to produce any agreement or evidence linking the respondent to the alleged infringement - Held that without prima facie case, no interim relief can be granted (Paras 2-4).

B) Copyright - Infringement - Burden of Proof - The petitioner claimed his script registered in 2008 was used without permission in respondent's film, but no material was placed to show similarity or access - Held that mere registration does not prove infringement without evidence (Paras 2-4).

C) Arbitration - Existence of Arbitration Agreement - The petitioner alleged an arbitration agreement but produced no document to support it - Held that Section 9 petition cannot be maintained without establishing existence of arbitration agreement (Paras 2-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, restraining the respondent from releasing the film 'KAMAAL DHAMAAL MALAMAAL' pending arbitration, based on alleged copyright infringement of the petitioner's registered script/story.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996
  • prima facie case
  • balance of convenience
  • interim injunction
  • copyright infringement
  • arbitration agreement
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (09) 51

Arbitration Petition (L) No.1262 of 2012

2012-09-27

Anoop V. Mohta, J.

Mr. Ashok M. Saraogi, a/w. Ms. Vaishali U. Jain, for Petitioner; Mr. Venkatesh Dhond, Senior Counsel, a/w. Mr. Ameet Naik, Mr. Abhishek Kale, Mr. Rohan, i/b. Naik Naik & Co., for Respondent

Mr. Prem Mohanlal Girdhani

M/s. Percept Picture

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim injunction against release of a film pending arbitration.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought an order restraining the respondent from releasing, exhibiting, or exploiting the film 'KAMAAL DHAMAAL MALAMAAL' or any film with similar story to his registered script.

Filing Reason

Petitioner alleged that his script/story registered in 2008 with the Writers' Association was used without permission in the respondent's film, and that the arbitration mechanism was unavailable due to non-availability of the committees.

Issues

Whether the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? Whether there exists an arbitration agreement between the parties?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that his script was registered in 2008 and the respondent's film is based on a similar story, and that the arbitration committees were not available to adjudicate the dispute. Respondent argued that there was no agreement between the parties and no prima facie case for injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

For grant of interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner must establish a prima facie case and the existence of an arbitration agreement. Mere allegations without documentary evidence are insufficient.

Judgment Excerpts

Except averments, there is nothing on record. The Petitioner however, indicates that a complaint dated 8th September 2012 filed before the Writers' Association (Dispute Settlement Committee). The case is that all these applications could not be considered, since the Tribunal/ Committee are not available for adjudication and as there is urgency, in view of the fact that the Film called 'KAMAAL DHAMAAL MALAMAAL' is due to release on 28th September 2012.

Procedural History

The petition was filed on an unspecified date, heard finally by consent at the admission stage, and dismissed on 27th September 2012.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 9
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Cheating by Personation in DEd Admission Fraud Case. Applicant misused sister's mark sheet and transfer certificate to gain admission and secure teaching job, convicted under Sections 419, 420, 471 IPC.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Review Applications in Land Acquisition Cases Based on Overruled Precedent. Court held review maintainable under Article 137 of Constitution of India as subsequent Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority overr...