Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 24 — Assignment of copyright

February 27th, 2013

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 41 Rule 24 — Assignment of copyright — Agreement assigning DVD, VCD and internet rights in respect of 15 films by way of lease for a period of 15 years — Validity of agreement — Suit for declaration and injunction — Trial court neither framed an issue touching the validity of Ex-B, agreement nor opportunity to lead evidence on this aspect was given to parties — In the peculiar facts, invoking of order XLI Rule 24 was not justified — Impugned judgment is set aside — Matter remitted back to trial court for framing additional issue on the validity of Ex-B, agreement and then to decide the case afresh after giving opportunity to parties to lead evidence — Copyright Act, 1957 — Section 2.

HELD: Since the trial Court had not framed specific issue touching the validity of agreement Exhibit B.1, the parties did not get effective opportunity to lead evidence in support of their respective cases. In the absence of any issue, the trial Court did not even advert to the question whether or not agreement Exhibit B.1 was valid. The evidence available on the record was not at all sufficient for deciding that question and yet the learned Single Judge decided that question by drawing inferences from the statements made by the witnesses examined by the parties with reference to the issues framed by the trial Court and returned a negative finding on the validity of Exhibit B.1.

In our view, in the peculiar facts of this case, the learned Single Judge was not at all justified in invoking Order XLI Rule 24 CPC. If at all the learned Single Judge felt that the trial Court should have framed specific issue on the validity of agreement Exhibit B.1, then he should have remanded the matter to the trial Court with a direction to frame such an issue and decide the suit afresh. The omission on the part of the learned Single Judge to adopt that course has resulted in manifest injustice to the appellant.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside and the case is remitted to the trial Court with the direction that it shall, after considering the pleadings of the parties, frame an additional issue on the validity of agreement Exhibit B.1 executed between respondent No.1 and respondent No.3, give opportunity to the parties to produce evidence and decide the suit afresh without being influenced by any of the observations made by the High Court and this Court — .

Divya Exports v. Shalimar Video Company[Bench Strength 2], Civil Appeal No. 6438/2005(02/09/2011), 2011 AIR(SC) 3063: 2011(9) SCALE 630 [G.S. Singhvi, J.: A.K. Ganguly, J.]

Entry Filed under: Commercial Laws,Judgements