Madras High Court
M/S.Lakshmi Prabha Production vs National Film Development ... on 29 September, 2021
C.S.No.736 of 1997
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.09.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.736 of 1997
and
O.A.Nos.797 and 798 of 1997
M/s.Lakshmi Prabha Production,
rep. by its Partner, S.Sridharan,
No.14, Brindavan Street,
Mylapore, Madras – 600 004. ... Plaintiff
.Vs.
1.National Film Development Corporation,
No.3, Fourth Street,
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai – 600 034.
2.Muktha Films,
No.7, Vaidyaraman Street,
T.Nagar, Madras – 600 017.
3.M/s.Vidya Movies,
No.7, Vaidyaraman Street,
T.Nagar, Madras – 600 017.
4.Thenandal Films,
No.8, 80 Feet Road,
Thevar Thottam,
Madras – 600 093.
Page No.1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.736 of 1997
5.Sri Priya Movies,
No.8, 80 Feet Road,
Thevar Thottam,
Madras – 600 093.
6.O.K.Films,
829, Airlines Building, I Floor,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
7.Om Sarvasiththi Combines,
No.31, Basaviah Street,
Washermanpet,
Madras – 600 002. ... Defendants
Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read
with Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 55 and
62 of the Copyrights Act praying for a decree and judgment for :
a) for a declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute copy right
owner of the pictures morefully described in the Schedule hereunder with
the right to exhibit, exploit, distribute and to telecast the said pictures in
the Doordarshan Kendras in South India;
b) Consequentially for permanent injunction restraining the
defendants, their agents and servants, executors and representatives and
any person and every person claiming through or under them and/or
authorized by them from intermeddling, interfering or infringing in any
manner whatsoever in plaintiff's copy right in telecasting the schedule
mentioned properties from Madras Doordarshan and
Page No.2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.736 of 1997
c) the costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.Syed Akhram
for Mr.PL.Narayanan
********
JUDGMENT
Mr.Syed Akhram, learned counsel representing Mr.PL.Narayanan,
learned counsel for the plaintiff would submit that the suit itself has
become infructuous due to passage of time.
2. Recording the said submission of the counsel for the plaintiff,
this suit is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs.
Consequently, the connected applications are closed.
29.09.2021
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-Speaking order
Page No.3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.736 of 1997
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil
29.09.2021
dsa
Page No.4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.736 of 1997
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
C.S.No.736 of 1997
29.09.2021
Page No.5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
