Madras High Court
Periasamy Kalaiappan vs A.R.Rahman on 19 July, 2021
CS No.904 of 2003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.904 of 2003
1. Periasamy Kalaiappan
2. G.Sridhar @ Dr.Gopu Sridhar ... Plaintiffs
Versus
1. A.R.Rahman
2. Sony Music Entertainment India Ltd.
Rep. By its Managing Director
3. Deepak Gattani
4. U T V Software Communication Ltd.,
Rep. By its Managing Director ... Defendants
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read
with Sections 55 and 62 of the Copy Rights Act, praying to pass a
judgment and decree:-
a) pass a Judgment and decree against the defendants jointly
and severally, to direct them to pay Rs.3 crores towards
damages for the breach committed by them in violation or
the Agreements dated 06.08.1998 and 10.11.1998 and to
pay interest together with the said amount @ 24% per
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CS No.904 of 2003
annum from the date of the plaint till the date of realisation;
b) for a declaration declaring that the plaintiffs are the
absolute owners of the 'Audio Rights' of the 'live' stage
programme held at A1-Shabhah Stadium, Dubai, U.A.E.
On 02.12.1998 performed by the first plaintiff and his
troupe. Consequently, injuncting the defendants, their
men, servants or agents or any one claiming under them or
acting on their behalf from in any way infringe the plaintiff
Audio rights assigned to them virtue of the said agreements
dated 06.08.1998 and 10.11.1998 in any other menner
either in future or on any other date;
c) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their
men, agents or servants or anyone acting on their behalf
from in any way sell or attempt to sell the cassettes under
any name containing any of the song sung by the singers at
the Live Stage Programme held at A1-Shabhab, Dubai,
U.A.E. On 02.12.1998, which is covered under the
Agreement dated 06.08.1998 & 10.11.1998;
d) grant such other suitable reliefs as this Court may deem fit
and proper in the above circumstances; and
e) pay the cost of the above suit.
For Plaintiffs : Mr.C.Umashankar
For Defendants : Ms. Narmadha Sampath, for D1
2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CS No.904 of 2003
JUDGMENT
Mr.C.Umashankar, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs
would submit that he had sent notices to the plaintiffs requiring their
instructions to proceed with the suit. While notice sent to the first plaintiff
was returned and the second plaintiff having received the same has not
responded. Hence the suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
19.07.2021
jv
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-speaking Order
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiffs: Nil.
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiffs: Nil.
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil.
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil.
19.07.2021
jv
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CS No.904 of 2003
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
jv
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar
Original Side,
High Court of Madras.
C.S.No.904 of 2003
19.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
