Case Note & Summary
The litigation arose from a civil suit (RCS No.3/2004) filed by Kopargaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited against 7 Star Distilleries and Royal Drinks Private Ltd., alleging infringement of copyright in the artistic label 'Bhingari Santra' used for country liquor. The plaintiff sought permanent injunction, damages of Rs.1,00,000 each, and destruction of infringing labels. The trial court initially dismissed the suit. On appeal (First Appeal No.734/2012), the Bombay High Court set aside the dismissal and remanded the matter for fresh trial. After remand, the District Judge-1, by judgment dated 1.8.2014, decreed the suit, restraining the defendants from infringing the copyright, awarding damages, and directing destruction of infringing labels. Defendant No.1 (7 Star Distilleries) challenged this decree in First Appeal No.316 of 2015 before the High Court. The appellant contended that the plaintiff failed to prove ownership of copyright, as the label was approved by the Assistant Commissioner on 4.4.1986, prior to the alleged contract of service with Mr. V.L. Kale on 18.5.1986. It argued that Mr. Kale's authorship was not established, the contract and deed of assignment were unproven, and the presumption under Section 48 of the Copyright Act, 1957 stood rebutted. The appellant also disputed damages and alleged that the decree went beyond the pleadings. The respondent-plaintiff countered that a subsequent suit (RCS No.2/2004) involving the same label and defendant had been decreed on 24.3.2015, with no appeal filed, and operated as res judicata. It relied on earlier judgments in rem and submitted that copyright infringement does not require exact reproduction. The judgment text is truncated; the court's analysis and final order are not included in the provided extract.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff proved ownership of copyright in the artistic label 'Bhingari Santra' and whether the defendants infringed such copyright; whether the decree in earlier suit RCS No.2/2004 operates as res judicata.
Law Points
- Ownership of copyright under Section 17 of the Copyright Act
- 1957
- first owner
- work made in the course of employment
- presumption under Section 48 of the Copyright Act
- rebuttal of presumption
- res judicata
- judgment in rem
- infringement of copyright
- damages for infringement
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (11) 4
First Appeal No.316 of 2015 with C.A.No.7072 of 2015 with C.A.No.1352 of 2015
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Mr. S.V. Dixit, Mr. Himanshu Kane, Mr. Vaibhav Joglekar, Mr. K.C. Sant
7 Star Distilleries (Formerly known as V.L.R. And Co., a registered Partnership Firm, through its Partner, R.B.Jaiswal)
Kopargaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited and Royal Drinks Private Ltd.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for copyright infringement of artistic label
Remedy Sought
Permanent injunction, damages, and destruction of infringing labels
Filing Reason
Plaintiff alleged defendants reproduced its copyrighted label in material form
Previous Decisions
Initially dismissed; on First Appeal No.734/2012, remanded for fresh trial; after remand decreed on 1.8.2014
Issues
Ownership of copyright in the artistic label 'Bhingari Santra'
Infringement of copyright by the defendants' labels
Applicability of presumption under Section 48 of the Copyright Act, 1957
Whether the decree in RCS No.2/2004 operates as res judicata
Entitlement to damages
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued plaintiff failed to prove ownership as label approved before alleged contract of service; Mr. Kale not author; contract and assignment unproven; presumption rebutted; damages not proved; labels not identical; decree beyond claim.
Respondent argued earlier suit RCS No.2/2004 decreed and no appeal, so res judicata; earlier judgments in rem; infringement not limited to exact reproduction; defendant No.2 not appealed so bound.
Judgment Excerpts
The trial Court also directed the defendants Nos.1 and 2 to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac) each by way of damages for infringement of the copyright...
According to the learned senior counsel when the artistic work which was already in existence at least in April 1986, is not proved to have been prepared by Mr.V.L.Kale. The Deed of Assignment would not be of any help to the plaintiff.
Procedural History
Plaintiff filed RCS No.3/2004 for copyright infringement. Trial court initially dismissed the suit. Plaintiff filed First Appeal No.734/2012. High Court set aside dismissal and remanded for fresh trial on 10.1.2014. After remand, District Judge-1 decreed the suit on 1.8.2014. Defendant No.1 preferred the present First Appeal No.316 of 2015.
Acts & Sections
- Copyright Act, 1957: 2(d)(iii), 17, 48
