Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S.Noves Communications Pvt. ... vs Hotel Leela Palace Chennai
2021 Latest Caselaw 13488 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 13488 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2021

Madras High Court
M/S.Noves Communications Pvt. ... vs Hotel Leela Palace Chennai on 7 July, 2021
                                                                      C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016
                                                                               & O.A.No.1138/2016

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    Dated : 07.07.2021

                                                        CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

                                            C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016(A)
                                                          and
                                                  O.A.No.1138 of 2016

                     M/s.Noves Communications Pvt. Ltd.,
                     Rep by its General Manager Operations,
                     Mr.N.Gopalakrishnan
                     B/301, Remi Biz Court, Plot No.9
                     Shah Industrial Estate,
                     Off Veeral Desai Road,
                     Andheri (West) Mumbai-400 058.                                   .. Plaintiff

                                                         /versus/

                     Hotel Leela Palace Chennai,
                     Represented by its General Manager,
                     Adyar Sea face, M.R.C.Nagar,
                     Chennai-600 028.                                               .. Defendant

                                    This Civil Suit is filed under Order IV Rule 1 Original Side
                     Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of CPC Read With Sections 51, 55, 62
                     of the Copyright Act, 1957, prayed for (a) For a permanent injunction
                     restraining the defendant, their men, partners, directors, employees,
                     agents, servants, assigns, heirs, successors, assignees, licensees,
                     representatives or any person claiming through them or acting on their


                     1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                      C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016
                                                                               & O.A.No.1138/2016

                     behalf or any other person claiming through/under them from in any
                     manner publicly performing or communicating the sound recordings
                     works of the plaintiff to the public or allowing their premises or any
                     premises under their control to be used for the said purpose without
                     license from the plaintiff or in otherwise infringing copyright in any
                     work assigned to the plaintiff;


                                   (b) Costs of the suit.
                                             For plaintiff      : Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam

                                             For Defendant      : No appearance

                                                     JUDGMENT

The suit is filed for the relief of permanent injunction

restraining the defendant, their men and agents from any manner publicly

performing or communicating the sound recording works of the plaintiff

to the public or allowing their premises for such communication.

2. At the time of admission, this Court, considering the prima

facie case made out by the plaintiff, granted interim order as prayed. The

suit summon was served on the defendant on 11.05.2017. However, there

is no appearance on behalf of the defendant.

3. Today, the learned counsel for the plaintiff states that the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016 & O.A.No.1138/2016

defendant has entered into compromise and agreed to pay royalty to the

plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff is not pressing the suit.

4. Recording the same, the suit is dismissed as not pressed.

Consequently, connected application is also closed. No order as to costs.




                                                                                        07.07.2021

                     Index                  : yes/no
                     rpl




                                                                    Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

                                                                                                 rpl



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016 & O.A.No.1138/2016

C.S.(Com.Div.) No.962 of 2016 and O.A.No.1138 of 2016

07.07.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter