Tax Management India. Com
                            Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals News SMS Articles Highlights
        Home        
 
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Versus Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd.

2012 (5) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT

Whether on a complaint made to the Copyright Board under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, 1957, the said Board under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1) can pass an interim order in the pending complaint - Held that:- In the instant case, the power being sought to be attributed to the Copyright Board involves the grant of the final relief, which is the only relief contemplated under Section 31 of the Copyright Act. Even in matters under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the copyright who withholds the same from the public, is no answer to the proposition that under Section 31 only an ultimate relief by way of grant of a licence on payment of reasonable charges to the copyright owner to publish and/or broadcast the work could be given. To grant an interim compulsory licence during the stay of the proceedings would amount to granting the final relief at the interim stage, although the power to grant such relief has not been vested in the Board. - It is no dou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er the same, as will no doubt happen, if an interim compulsory licence is granted. If the legislature had intended that the Copyright Board should have powers to grant mandatory injunction at the interim stage, it would have vested the Board with such authority. The submission made that there is no bar to grant such interim relief in Section 31 has to be rejected since the presence of a power cannot be inferred from the absence thereof in the Statute itself. Appeal allowed. - CIVIL APPEAL NOS.41 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on throughout this judgment, the same is extracted hereinbelow : 31. Compulsory licence in works withheld from public.-(1) If at any time during the term of copyright in any Indian work which has been published or performed in public, a complaint is made to the Copyright Board that the owner of copyright in the work- (a) has refused to republish or allow the republication of the work or has refused to allow the performance in public of the work, and by reason of such refusal the work is withheld .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Registrar of Copyrights to grant to the complainant a licence to re-publish the work, perform the work in public or communicate the work to the public by [broadcast], as the case may be, subject to payment to the owner of the copyright of such compensation and subject to such other terms and conditions as the Copyright Board may determine; and thereupon the Registrar of Copyrights shall grant the licence to the complainant in accordance with the directions of Copyright Board, on payment of such .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der the said question, it is necessary to set out some of the facts giving rise to the said question. 4. These appeals preferred by Super Cassettes Industries Ltd., hereinafter referred to as Super Cassettes , are directed against the order dated 1st September, 2011, passed by the Delhi High Court whereby it reversed the order passed by the Copyright Board on 28th March, 2011, in which the Board held that it did not have the power to grant an interim compulsory licence. By its judgment and order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nterim compulsory licence against Super Cassettes with the further direction to the Board to fix its own terms for such licences, after hearing the parties. 5. Appearing for Super Cassettes, Mr. Amit Sibal, learned counsel, submitted that on 16th May, 2008, this Court had decided the two set of cases, in which it upheld the setting aside of the compulsory licence granted against Super Cassettes by the Copyright Board in relation to Entertainment Network India Ltd., hereinafter referred to as ENI .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

August, 2010, fixing the rates, not just for PPL, but for all music providers, including Super Cassettes, although, it was not a party to the proceedings. Mr. Sibal submitted that on 9th September, 2010, Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as MBPL , wrote to Super Cassettes informing it that MBPL proposed to broadcast the works in which copyright was owned by Super Cassettes on the terms fixed in the aforesaid order of the Copyright Board dated 25th August, 2010. Mr. Sibal submitt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Cassettes and the Respondents, including MBPL, on 15th September, 2010, the Delhi High Court passed an interim order to the effect that the order dated 25th August, 2010, passed by the Board would not be relied upon by any of the Respondents or any other party for a compulsory licence against Super Cassettes. Despite the aforesaid order of the Delhi High Court dated 15th September, 2010, MBPL filed an application for compulsory licence under Section 31(1)(b) of the Copyright Act, relying solely .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to broadcast the work of Super Cassettes on existing mutually agreed terms which were different from the terms set out in the order of the Copyright Board dated 25th August, 2010. By its order dated 28th March, 2011, the Copyright Board dismissed the application for interim relief filed by MBPL holding that it did not have the power to grant any interim compulsory licence. 8. Mr. Sibal submitted that even though MBPL did not broadcast the works of Super Cassettes after 25th December, 2010, its .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der of the Delhi High Court, inter alia, held that the power to grant interim relief is not dependent upon a specific statutory empowerment to this effect. The power is a common law principle and is not founded on any statute or legislation. Mr. Sibal submitted that the Delhi High Court also held that the refusal of the copyright holder to grant a licence would, in effect, compel the broadcaster or any other party similarly placed, into succumbing to the demands of the owners and that since, lit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and nugatory. 10. It was further held by the High Court that where the controversy concerns only the quantum of licence fee, an interim protection should be granted and even though Super Cassettes was not a party to the order of the Copyright Board dated 25th August, 2010, it is similarly placed as PPL, which was bound by the order passed by the Board on 25th August, 2010. Accordingly, it was appropriate that Super Cassettes should also receive 2% of the net advertisement revenue as licence fee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. The High Court disposed of the appeal by making an interim arrangement, whereby Super Cassettes was to receive an aggregate of 4% of the advertisement revenue of MBPL for broadcasting its sound recordings, music and literary work, while remanding the matter to the Copyright Board for interim order, making it clear that the Board need not be bound by the interim arrangement devised by the Court. 12. Mr. Sibal submitted that the High Court had erred in law in holding that even in the absence of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tain limited powers of a civil court on the Board, the same were procedural in nature and did not vest the Board with a substantive right to grant interim orders under Section 31 of the Act. Mr. Sibal submitted that the High Court had erred in holding that grant of interim relief was not dependent upon a specific statutory empowerment to this effect. Learned counsel submitted that being a creature of statute, the Copyright Board could only exercise such powers as were expressly vested in it by t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

blished under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, had the power to recall an ex parte order. After examining various provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, this Court held that such an express power not having been conferred on the District Forum and the State Commission, they had no jurisdiction to exercise such powers which had not been expressly given to them. 14. Mr. Sibal also referred to the decision of this Court in Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund Vs. Kartick Das [(1994) 4 SCC 225], wherein .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o how an interim injunction could ever be granted disregarding even the balance of convenience. 15. Reference was also made to a decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Sham Lal Vs. State Election Commission [AIR 1997 P&H 164], in which the High Court was considering a similar question as to whether the Election Tribunal constituted under the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, had the power to pass an injunction so as to restrain an elected representative from assuming offi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d impede the implementation of the result of election. 16. Mr. Sibal cited yet another decision on the same issue rendered by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Lingamma Vs. State of Karnataka [AIR 1982 Karnataka 18], where the question involved was as to whether the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976, was empowered to pass interim orders when there was no express provision which conferred such substantive power on the Appellate Tribunal. The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ght Board with substantive powers to pass interim orders under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, the High Court erred in taking a view which was contrary to the well-established principle that a statutory body could exercise only such powers that were vested in it by a statute and not otherwise. Learned counsel urged that by making an interim arrangement and granting an interim compulsory licence to the Respondent, the High Court had conferred upon itself a jurisdiction which the Copyright Board .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vil Court and, therefore, exercised all the powers of the Civil Court in respect of the matters entrusted to them by statute. In this regard, reference was made to Section 41(1) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 1985, which specifically provides that the Tribunal shall have all jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable by all courts in matters relating to service. Reference was also made to other Tribunals, such as, the Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal, the National Gree .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ued to be a tribunal governed by the statute under which it had been created. It did not, therefore, have jurisdiction to pass interim orders which inheres in other Tribunals. Referring to the decision of this Court in Bindeshwari Prasad Singh Vs. Kali Singh [(1977) 1 SCC 57], Mr. Sibal urged that in the said decision, this Court was called upon to decide as to whether a Magistrate had the authority to review or recall his order. It was held that unlike Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and it does not have inherent powers which existed in the civil courts. 21. Mr. Sibal also submitted that apart from the decisions rendered in the case of Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund (supra), the Supreme Court had held on several occasions that while entertaining matters, final relief ought not to have been granted at the interim stage. In fact, as submitted by Mr. Sibal, the courts will not imply a power in a particular provision of the statute if the legislative intent behind the statute sugge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as a statutory right unless a statute expressly allowed the same. The power to override such pre-existing right had to be in express terms and could not be implied. Various other decisions were referred to by Mr. Sibal, which will only amount to repetition to what has already been stated. 22. Mr. Sibal submitted that the High Court erred in holding that the Copyright Board had power to grant an interim compulsory licence and that when there was a dispute as to the quantum of fees payable by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ulsory licence, the same would have to be read into the Section as being incidental to the powers granted by the Statute to the Board to grant compulsory licences. Dr. Singhvi urged that it could not have been the intention of the legislature that pending the determination of the right of an applicant to a compulsory licence, the public should be deprived of the entertainment of listening to music in respect of which the owner has the copyright, in this case, Super Cassettes. 24. Dr. Singhvi urg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

only lend strength to the submission that the Board is vested with incidental and ancillary powers under Section 31 of the Act to give effect to the final relief which it is empowered to give under the said Section. 25. Dr. Singhvi referred to Section 25 of the Trade Marks Act as also Section 25(i) and (ii) of the Patents Act, which vested the authorities under the said Acts to pass appropriate orders in aid of the final relief. Dr. Singhvi urged that it is in situations such as these, that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reasonableness of royalties claimed by performing rights societies and to fix the rates thereof and to consider applications for general licences for public broadcasting of works. Dr. Singhvi submitted that it is in that context that Section 12 of the Copyright Act would have to be read. Under Section 12, which defines the powers and procedure of the Copyright Board, it has been stipulated that the Board would, subject to any rules that may be made under the Act, have the power to regulate its o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

984, in regard to disputes with respect to assignment of copyright. It was submitted that the said provision clearly indicated that the Board was an adjudicating authority in regard to disputes between the parties and would, therefore, be deemed to be vested with ancillary powers to make interim orders in aid of the final relief that could be granted under Section 31 of the Act. 28. Dr. Singhvi urged that the Copyright Act contemplated the grant of three types of licences, namely :- (i) voluntar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Act also made provision that certain acts performed by broadcasters were not to be considered as infringement of copyright. In particular, reference was made by Dr. Singhvi to Section 52(1)(j)(iv) which indicates that the making of sound recordings in respect of any literary, dramatic or musical work would not amount to infringement of copyright if the person making such sound recording allowed the owner of the right or his duly authorised agent or representative to inspect all records and book .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cation to India by the Indian Copyright Act, 1914. 29. In support of the submissions made by him, Dr. Singhvi referred to various decisions, beginning with the decision of this Court in Income Tax Officer Vs. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi [(1969) 2 SCR 65], wherein the power of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to stay recovery of penalty was under consideration. Although, such power was not directly vested in the Tribunal, the High Court held that the power to order the stay or recovery of penalty is an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ial Institutions Act, 1993, hereinafter referred to as the DRT Act , wherein it was held that in a Suit under Section 19(1) for recovery of monies, the Tribunal acted within its powers in passing an interim order to restrain the defendants from recovering any money from a particular party. It was held that in view of Section 22(1) of the Act, the Tribunal could exercise powers contained in the Civil Procedure Code and could even go beyond the Code as long as it passed orders in conformity with t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lso observed that in addition, Rule 18 enabled the Tribunal to pass orders to secure the ends of justice. Dr. Singhvi urged that the aforesaid decision of this Court was based on its earlier decision in Industrial Credit & Investment Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Grapco Industries Ltd. & Ors. [(1999) 4 SCC 710], wherein it had been held that the Debts Recovery Tribunal had jurisdiction under Section 19(6) of the DRT Act to grant interim orders, since such power inheres in a Tribunal. 30. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ourt which have categorically held that powers to pass certain interim orders were incidental and ancillary to the exercise of powers conferred on a Tribunal by the Statute, the doctrine of implied power would stand attracted and the orders of the High Court could not, therefore, be faulted. 31. Mr. Bhaskar P. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for some of the interveners, adopted Dr. Singhvi s submissions and reiterated the concept that the Copyright Act is a complete code in itself and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1(1)(b) which may subsequently convert the voluntary licence given under Section 30 of the Copyright Act into a compulsory licence under Section 31 thereof. Mr. Gupta contended that since Section 31(1)(b) of the Act contemplates adjudication, the Copyright Board had the trappings of a quasi-judicial authority which inheres in itself the right to pass interim orders in the interest of the parties and to apply the principles of natural justice, keeping in mind the public interest. In this regard, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the Civil Court. 33. Mrs. Prathiba Singh, learned Advocate, who appeared for one of the parties, while reiterating the submissions made by Dr. Singhvi and Mr. Gupta, submitted that the powers of the Board had been gradually increased by legislation from time to time and even in regard to the question of subsisting licences and the grant of new licences, there could be no dispute as to the powers vested in the Copyright Board and the orders which it was competent to pass. Mrs. Singh, however, i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mate in regard to cases where matters were pending before the Board and the public would be deprived of the pleasure of listening to such music and sound broadcasting. 34. Mr. Harish Salve, learned Senior Advocate, in his turn provided another twist to the question under consideration in urging that inherent powers exist in an appellate forum. Mr. Salve urged that this was not a case where the Copyright Board was not entitled to pass orders of an interim nature, but whether it should exercise su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fees payable for the use of the copyright, which was being withheld from the public. According to Mr. Salve, the essence of the Copyright Act is the delicate balance between intellectual property rights and the rights of access to the copyright material. In such a situation, according to Mr. Salve, a private right of copyright would have to give way to the public interest as contemplated in Section 31 of the Copyright Act. 35. Replying to the submissions made on behalf of the Respondents and th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ner for use of the copyright when the same was withheld from the public. Referring to the decision between ENIL and the Appellant in Entertainment Network (India ) Limited Vs. Super Cassette Industries Limited [(2008) 13 SCC 30], Mr. Sibal referred to paragraph 116 thereof, which is extracted hereinbelow :- 116. Section 31(1)(b) in fact does not create an entitlement in favour of an individual broadcaster. The right is to approach the Board when it considers that the terms of offer for grant of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f another person has a copyright. It, however, would not mean that all and sundry can file applications. The mechanism to be adopted by the Board for determining the right of a complainant has been provided under the Act. Mr. Sibal urged that the decision of the High Court was liable to be set aside and that of the Copyright Board was liable to be restored. 37. What emerges from the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties is the dispute as to the width of the powers vested in the Co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Act, which comes within the said Chapter, provides for the constitution of a Copyright Board, which would hold office for such period and on such terms and conditions as may be prescribed. Section 12 enumerates the powers and procedure of the Board and is extracted hereinbelow :- 12.Powers and procedure of Copyright Board. - (1) The Copyright Board shall, subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, have power to regulate its own procedure, including the fixing of places and times o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and discharge its powers and functions through Benches constituted by the Chairman of the Copyright Board from amongst its members, each Bench consisting of not less than three members: [Provided that, if the Chairman is of opinion that any matter of importance is required to be heard by a larger Bench, he may refer the matter to a special Bench consisting of five members.] (3) If there is a difference of opinion among the members of the Copyright Board or any Bench thereof in respect of any ma .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l take part in any proceedings before the Board in respect of any matter in which he has a personal interest. (6) No act done or proceeding taken by the Copyright Board under this Act shall be questioned on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy in, or defect in the constitution of, the Board. (7) The Copyright Board shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of [sections 345 and 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)] and all proceedings before the Board sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sions clearly indicate that the Copyright Board discharges quasi-judicial functions, which as indicated in Sections 19-A, 31, 31-A, 32 and 52, requires the Board to decide disputes in respect of matters arising therefrom. In fact, Section 6 also spells out certain disputes which the Copyright Board has to decide, and its decision in respect thereof has been made final. However, for the purposes of these appeals we are concerned mainly with Section 31, which has been extracted hereinabove. 38. El .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

yright in a work has withheld the same from the public, after giving the owner of the copyright in the work a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding such inquiry as it may consider necessary and on being satisfied that the grounds for withholding the work are not reasonable, to direct the Registrar of Copyrights to grant to the complainant a licence to republish the work, perform the work in public or communicate the work to the public by broadcast, as the case may be, subject t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f a final decision of an application. 39. As has been held by this Court in innumerable cases, a Tribunal is a creature of Statute and can exercise only such powers as are vested in it by the Statute. There is a second school of thought which propagates the view that since most Tribunals have the trappings of a Court, it would be deemed to have certain ancillary powers, though not provided by the Statute, to maintain the status-quo as prevailing at the time of filing of an application, so that t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the extent that in the absence of any express power conferred on the District Forum and the State Commission under the Consumer Protection Act, they had no jurisdiction to exercise powers which had not been expressly given to them. 40. Even the decision rendered in Bindeshwari Prasad Singh s case (supra), which was a decision as to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate to review or recall his order, it was held that in the absence of any specific power in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Magistrat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. In the instant case, the power being sought to be attributed to the Copyright Board involves the grant of the final relief, which is the only relief contemplated under Section 31 of the Copyright Act. Even in matters under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an interim relief granting the final relief should be given after exercise of great caution and in rare and exceptional cases. In the instant case, such a power is not even vested in the Copyright Boar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owner to publish and/or broadcast the work could be given. To grant an interim compulsory licence during the stay of the proceedings would amount to granting the final relief at the interim stage, although the power to grant such relief has not been vested in the Board. 43. It is no doubt true, that Tribunals discharging quasi-judicial functions and having the trappings of a Court, are generally considered to be vested with incidental and ancillary powers to discharge their functions, but that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nction at the interim stage, it would have vested the Board with such authority. The submission made that there is no bar to grant such interim relief in Section 31 has to be rejected since the presence of a power cannot be inferred from the absence thereof in the Statute itself. 45. In the aforesaid circumstances, we have no hesitation in allowing the appeals and setting aside the impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court. The Appeals are, accordingly, allowed. There w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hich are categorised as powers ancillary to their jurisdiction irrespective of the fact that the Statute, which created the jurisdiction, does not, always, expressly provide for the exercise of such ancillary powers. This Court has held on more than one occasion that such powers could be implied - Income Tax Officer vs. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi, 1969 (2) SCR 65 and Allahabad Bank, Calcutta vs. Radha Krishna Maity and others, (1999) 6 SCC 755. As noticed by my learned brother at para 39 of the Judgmen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

subject matter of the dispute and / or the pecuniary value of the dispute; or (2) the territorial nexus of either the parties to the dispute or the subject matter of the dispute to the Court or Tribunal. 4. In the context of Courts adjudicating civil disputes, the jurisdiction and powers necessary to effectively exercise the jurisdiction, such as, securing the presence of defendants / respondents or witnesses, granting of interim orders etc., and the method and manner of enforcement of a decisi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunals, but also the Courts are structured by the statutory grants and limitations. 6. However, both the grant as well as the limitations could be either express or implied from the scheme of a particular enactment. The considerations relevant for ascertaining whether there is an implied grant of such powers, as can be culled out from the various Judgments relied upon by the learned counsel appearing in these matters, which have been taken note of by my learned brother Justice Kabir, appear t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lly, grant a relief by way of an interim measure, which is either identical with or substantially the same as the final relief sought in the proceeding, is based on the ground that indiscriminate grant of such interim reliefs are capable of producing public mischief see Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Limited and others, (1985) 1 SCC 260. This Court opined that the injury, if any, to the party approaching the Court is reversible and the public in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

subject matter of the dispute, etc., in deciding the question whether an adjudicatory body can be said to have been invested with the power to grant interim orders, which are identical or substantially similar to the final relief that can be afforded in the lis by implication from the scheme and language of the enactment, which created the jurisdiction. 10. For deciding the question whether the Copyright Board, exercising the jurisdiction under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, can grant ad hoc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r of the copyright to determine. It is, further, the right of the owner to decide on what terms and conditions (which need not necessarily be related to money alone), he would part with the copyright of his work if ever he decides to part with it. However, Section 31 of the Copyright Act creates an exception to the abovementioned principle of the right of the owner of the copyright. In substance - the Section deprives the copyright of the owner against his volition. In other words, by Section 31 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r of a copyright has; (1) either refused to republish or allow the republication of his work or refused to allow the performance in public of the work; (2) by reason of such refusal the work is withheld from the public; and (3) the grounds for such refusal are not reasonable. It is in the abovementioned circumstances, if the Copyright Board is satisfied that the grounds of refusal are not reasonable, the Copyright Board is authorised, by law, to take steps for the grant of a compulsory licence. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.