Skip to content


Hira Lal and ors. Vs. Saraswati - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectIntellectual Property Rights
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in30Ind.Cas.480
AppellantHira Lal and ors.
RespondentSaraswati
Excerpt:
copyright act (iii of 1914), section 7(a) -copyright--translation, by author, right in--copyright act (xx of 1847). - .....part i, in hindi but died before he could publish it. his widow, the complainant, had the new work printed and published by the applicants in 1811, three years later the applicants published another edition of the translation guide in hindi, but suppressed the name of the author and claimed to be the proprietors of it. for the applicants it is contended that the complainant had no copyright in the hindi work. copyright' did not formerly include the exclusive right of translation, but the author of a book who made a translation of it was entitled to a copyright in it as if it were an original work. therefore even if the hindi book in question is only a translation of the urdu book, ajudhia prasad, and his widow after him, had copyright in the hindi book. section 4 of the act of 1914.....
Judgment:

Chamier, J.

1. The applicants have been convicted of air offence under Section 7(a) of the Indian Copyright Act, 1914. Ajudhia Prasad wrote a book in Urdu called 'Translation Guide, Part 1', and had it printed in 1897 by the applicants who are the owners of a press. He also wrote a Translation Guide, Part I, in Hindi but died before he could publish it. His widow, the complainant, had the new work printed and published by the applicants in 1811, Three years later the applicants published another edition of the Translation Guide in Hindi, but suppressed the name of the author and claimed to be the proprietors of it. For the applicants it is contended that the complainant had no copyright in the Hindi work. Copyright' did not formerly include the exclusive right of translation, but the author of a book who made a translation of it was entitled to a copyright in it as if it were an original work. Therefore even if the Hindi book in question is only a translation of the Urdu book, Ajudhia Prasad, and his widow after him, had copyright in the Hindi book. Section 4 of the Act of 1914 to which Counsel has referred has no bearing upon the case. The application is dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //