Skip to content


Diamond Pocket Books P. Ltd. Vs. Prasad Nyas and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectIntellectual Property Rights
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSuit Appeal No. 641 of 1988
Judge
Reported in1989(17)DRJ110
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 8, Rule 10; Copyright Act - Sections 22
AppellantDiamond Pocket Books P. Ltd.
RespondentPrasad Nyas and ors.
Advocates: Parveen Anand and; Manoj Perghad, Advs
Excerpt:
copyright act, 1957 - the plaintiff filed suit for declaration claiming copyright to the works of late sh. jai shanker parsad, who died on 15th november 1937 has come to an end 50 years since death. it was held that the copyright having come to end 50 years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year when another died, the plaintiffs were entitled to publish the work. - - in this view of the matter, in terms of order 8 rule 10 of the civil procedure code .if the defendants fail to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the court, as the case may be, the court shall pronounce judgment against him or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit upon such judgment, a decree shall be drawn up. (6) plaintiffs are also further entitled to an..........pocket books pvt. ltd. and punjabi pustak bhandar against prasad nyas, prasad prakashan and rattan shankar prasad.(2) by order of this court dated 29-7-88 and 27-10-88, defendants were directed to file their written statement no. written statement has been filed as directed by the court. in this view of the matter, in terms of order 8 rule 10 of the civil procedure code . if the defendants fail to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the court, as the case may be, the court shall pronounce judgment against him or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit upon such judgment, a decree shall be drawn up. there is yet another reason for adopting this course for pronouncing judgment against the defendants.(3) the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration.....
Judgment:

Mahinder Narain, J.

(1) This is a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, rendition of accounts filed by Diamod Pocket Books Pvt. Ltd. and Punjabi Pustak Bhandar against Prasad Nyas, Prasad Prakashan and Rattan Shankar Prasad.

(2) By order of this Court dated 29-7-88 and 27-10-88, defendants were directed to file their written statement No. written statement has been filed as directed by the Court. In this view of the matter, in terms of Order 8 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code . if the defendants fail to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the Court, as the case may be, the Court shall pronounce judgment against him or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit upon such judgment, a decree shall be drawn up. There is yet another reason for adopting this course for pronouncing judgment against the defendants.

(3) The plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration seeking a declaration that copyright to the works of late Shri Jai Shankar Prasad, who died on 15th November, 1937 has come an end 50 years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the author dies, in terms of Section 22 of the Copyright Act. The Copyright thus came to an end on lit January, 1988. The date on which the Calendar year begins 50 years after the author had expired.

(4) In this view of the matter, the right to reproduce the works of late Sh. Jai Shankar Prasad in any material form got converted from an exclusive right into a public right, and in pursuance thereof any person could publish the works of late Sh. Jai Shankar Prasad.

(5) As in view of the provisions of Order 8 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code . and in view of Section 22 of the Copyright Act, the averments contained in the plaint have to be deemed to have been admitted, the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that they are entitled to publish the works of late Sh. Jai Shankar Prasad. Indeed as stated above every person is entitled to publish the works of the said author as they have entered Public Domain.

(6) Plaintiffs are also further entitled to an injunction against the defendants holding out threats like the one contained in letter dated 6th March, 1981 written by the defendants to the plaintiffs.

(7) As and from 1st January, 1988, there is no question of any person whatsoever having any exclusive right to publish the works of late Sh. Jai Shankar Prasad.

(8) The plaintiff has been held to be entitled to a declaration and injunction which has beer. sought Plaintiffs claim for rendition of accounts is however, dismissed.

(9) In the facts ana circumstances of the case, I think that the plaintiff is entitled to costs. The costs are quantified at Rs. 2100.00.


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