- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 378 OF 2021 (IPR) C/W CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 377 OF 2021 (IPR), CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 120 OF 2022 , CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 122 OF 2022 (IO) CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 215 OF 2022 (IPR), CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 218 OF 2022 (IPR), IN CRP No. 378/2021 BETWEEN: STAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (STAR SUVARNA KANNADA CHANNEL) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT URMI ESTATE, GANPATRAO KADAM MARG, RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI – 400 013 ALSO AT CHERRY HILLS, GROUND FLOOR, EMBASSY GOLF LINKS, BUSINESS PARK, INTEMEDIATE RING ROAD, DOMLUR, BENGALURU – 560 011. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. S. NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL, SRI. SUDARSHANA M.J. AND SMT. GITANJALI M. MATHEW, ADVOCATES) R Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AND: 1. KANNADA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 1023/138, S.V. TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD BENGALURU – 560 010 THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT MR. D.K. RAMAKRISHNA 2. M/S VIACOM18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMTED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS RD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY SUDHANSHUVATS, MANAGING DIRECTOR 3. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO. NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE, NO. 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR M.G. ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560 001 CORPORATE AND REGISTERED OFFICE 18TH FLOOR, A – WING, MARATHON FUTUREX LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY SUBHASH CHANDRA, CHAIRMAN 4. SUVARNA T V (ASIANET EARLIER) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE NO. 36, SHIVANANDA CIRCLE, OPP: MALLIGE HOSPITAL, CRESCENT ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS RERPESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 5. KASTHURI MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARASWAMY, DIRECTOR 6. PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CIRCLE, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY H R RANGANATH, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 7. PUBLIC TV / PUBLIC MOVIES M/S WRITMEN MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMNET 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CIRCLE, YESHWANTHPUR BENGLAURU – 560 022 RERPESENTED BY H R RANGANATH CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 8. SIRI KANNADA NO. 1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 9. JIO MOVIES RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROD, BANGLAORE – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY HITAL R. MESWANI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 10. AIRTEL EXTREAM M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED UNITED WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR – 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN – 122 001, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR, BENGALURU OFFICE NO.2 A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE – 560 103, REPRESENTED BY MR. SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL, CHAIRMAN 11. M/S TATA SKY LTD., UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR, WINDSOR OFF, C S T ROAD, KALINA, SANTACRUZ (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 098 REPRESENTED BY BHARATH VASANI, DIRECTOR 12. YOU TUBE LLC GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, NO.3, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA RD, SADANANDANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 016, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 13. FACE BOOK INDIA ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI, INDIA – 400 051, FACEBOOK HYDERABAD OFFICE BUILDING NO.20, RAHEJA MINDSPACE, K. RAHEJA I.T. PARK, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS HITECH CITY ROAD, VITTAL RAO NAGAR, HITEC CITY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA – 500 081, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 14. BIG FLIX 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 15. DISNEY HOTSTAR M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI, MAHARSTRA – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY UDAY SHANKER, PRESIDENT 16. M/S EROS NOW 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING OFF VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA – 400 053 REPRESETNED BY KISHORE LULLA EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN. 17. M/S MX PLAYER MX PLAYER, 2ND FLOOR WING A, KANKIA WALL STREET, VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EATS, MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY MAHENDRA SONI, DIRECTOR 18. VOOT M/S VICOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ZION BIZWORLD, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS SUBHASH ROAD – A, VILE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 057 MAHARASTRA REP. BY RAHUL JOSHI, MANAGING DIRECTOR 19. M/S AMAZON PRIME KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA REP. BY ITS MANAING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 20. YUPPTV 8-2-293/82/A/773 ROAD NO. 44, JUBLILLE HILLS HYDERABAD – 500 033 21. NAMMA FLIX NO. 24, MY WORK AREA BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGLAORE – 560 020 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 22. SUN NEXT NO 9, MARAN TOWERS BRUNTON ROAD, CRIAG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATALA – 560 025 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 23. ZEE-5 KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE NO 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR, M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 24. RAJ MUSIC KANNADA RAJ KANNDA MUSIC CHANNEL FALT NO 16/1, KKMP MILLERS TANK BUND ROAD - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 25. LAHARAI RECORDING COMPANY PVT. LTD. 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, YEHSWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 26. PUBLIC MUSIC 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CILRCE, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGLAURU – 560 022 REP. BY H. R. RANGAANTH CHARIMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 27. HOTSTAR STAR INDIA PVT. LTD. NO.66, LAKE VIEW BUILDING BAGMANE TECH PARK, A BLOCK , 7TH FLOOR, C V RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 093 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 28. SHERMAROO ENTERTAIN LTD., SHEMAROO HOUSE, FLAT NO 18, MAROLCO-OP- INDUSTRIAL ESTATE OFF ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI – 400 059, REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 29. JHANKAR MUSIC FLAT NO.53/A, GROUND FLOOR, KHADI COMMISSION HBCS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, KATARAI GUPPE MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 085 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 30. TELEGRAM 23RD FLOOR, BUSINESS CENTRAL TOWERS TOWR A, 1003-1004, DUBAI MEDIA CITY, DUBAI – 501 919 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C.M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. PRANAV KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R6, R7, R22, R25 & R26; SRI. TARUN SURANA, ADVOCATE FOR R29; VIDE ORDER DATED 10.01.2022 NOTICE TO R2 TO R5, R8 TO R24, R27, R28 & R30 ARE DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED IN OS No.25863/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 377/2021 BETWEEN: STAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (SUVARNA TV) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT URMI ESTATE, GANPATRAO KADAM MARG, RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI – 400 013 ALSO AT CHERRY HILLS, GROUND FLOOR, EMBASSY GOLF LINKS, BUSINESS PARK, INTEMEDIATE RING ROAD, DOMLUR, BENGALURU – 560 071. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. S. NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL, SMT. GITANJALI M. MATHEW AND SRI. SUDARSHANA M.J., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. KANNADA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, HAVING ITS REGISTERED - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS OFFICE AT NO. 1023/138, S.V. TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD BENGALURU – 560 010 THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT MR. D.K. RAMAKRISHNA 2. UDAYA T V (SUN NETWORK) M/S SUN TV NETWORK LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS R ELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT NO.09 MARAN TOWERS, BRUNTON ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOKNAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATAKA – 560 025 CORPORATE OFFICE: MURASOLI MARAN TOWERS 72, MRC NAGAR MAIN ROAD, MRC NAGAR, CHENNAI – 600 028 REP. BY R. MAHESH KUMAR, MANAGING DIRECTOR 3. M/S VIACOM18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMTED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS RD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY SUDHANSHUVATS, MANAGING DIRECTOR 4. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO. NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE, NO. 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR M.G. ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560 001 CORPORATE AND REGISTERED OFFICE 18TH FLOOR, A – WING, MARATHON FUTUREX LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS SUBHASH CHANDRA, CHAIRMAN 5. KASTHURI MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARASWAMY, DIRECTOR 6. PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CIRCLE, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY H R RANGANATH, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 7. PUBLIC TV / PUBLIC MOVIES M/S WRITMEN MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMNET 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CIRCLE, YESHWANTHPUR BENGLAURU – 560 022 RERPESENTED BY H R RANGANATH CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 8. SIRI KANNADA NO. 1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 9. ANAND AUDIO VIDEO MI - M10, WHITE HOSUE, - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS NO.23/29, ST. MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 10. M/S SRI GANESH VIDEO NO.1, SRI CHAMUNDESHWARI COMPLEX, S. P. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR/CHAIRMAN 11. JIO MOVIES RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY HITAL R. MESWANI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 12. AIRTEL EXTREAM M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED UNITED WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR – 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN – 122 001, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR, BENGALURU OFFICE NO.2 A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE – 560 103, REPRESENTED BY MR. SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL, CHAIRMAN 13. M/S TATA SKY LTD., UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR, WINDSOR OFF, C S T ROAD, KALINA, SANTACRUZ (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 098 REPRESENTED BY BHARATH VASANI, DIRECTOR 14. YOU TUBE LLC GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, NO.3, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA RD, - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS SADANANDANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 016, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 15. FACE BOOK INDIA ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI, INDIA – 400 051, FACEBOOK HYDERABAD OFFICE BUILDING NO.20, RAHEJA MINDSPACE, K. RAHEJA I.T. PARK, HITECH CITY ROAD, VITTAL RAO NAGAR, HITEC CITY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA – 500 081, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 16. BIG FLIX 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 17. DISNEY HOTSTAR M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI, MAHARSTRA – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY UDAY SHANKER, PRESIDENT 18. M/S EROS NOW 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING OFF VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA – 400 053 REPRESETNED BY KISHORE LULLA EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN 19. M/S MX PLAYER MX PLAYER, 2ND FLOOR WING A, KANKIA WALL STREET, - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY MAHENDRA SONI, DIRECTOR 20. VOOT M/S VICOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ZION BIZWORLD, SUBHASH ROAD – A, VILE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 057 MAHARASTRA REP. BY RAHUL JOSHI, MANAGING DIRECTOR 21. M/S AMAZON PRIME KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA REP. BY ITS MANAING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 22. YUPPTV 8-2-293/82/A/773 ROAD NO. 44, JUBLILLE HILLS HYDERABAD – 500 033 23. NAMMA FLIX NO. 24, MY WORK AREA BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGLAORE – 560 020 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C.M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 07.01.2022 NOTICE TO R3 TO R5, R8 TO R23 ARE DISPENSED WITH SRI. PRANAV KUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R2, R6 & R7) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED ON APPLICATION IN O.S.NO.25749/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS APPLICATIONS FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 120/2022 BETWEEN: 1. M/S VIACOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SITER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER LEAGAL AND CONTENT REGULATION, MR SUGHOSH NIGALE. 2. VOOT AN OTT PLATFORM OF M/S VIACOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, ZION BIZWORLD, SUBHASH ROAD - A, VILE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAIN – 400 057 MAHARASHTRA, REPRESENTED BY MR.SUGHOSH NIGALE. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHYAM SUNDAR H. V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KANNADA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION No.1023/138, SV TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO. NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560 001 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS CORPORATE AND REGISTERED OFFICE 18TH FLOOR, A – WING, MARATHON FUTUREX LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SUBHASH CHANDRA, 3. SUVARNA TV. (ASIANET EARLIER) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT No.36, SHIVANANDA CIRCLE, OPPOSITE MALLIEGE HOSPITAL, CRESENT ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. KASTHURI MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARSWAMY, DIRECTOR. 5. PUBLIC MOVIES, PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR RANGANATH H.R 6. PUBLIC TV/ PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENT ED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR RANGANATH H R - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 7. SIRI KANNADA No.1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL, 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 8. JIO MOVIES, RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HITAL R. MESWANI. 9. AIRTEL EXTREAM M/S BHARATI AIRTEL LIMITED UNITECH WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR – 122 001 BENGALURU OFFICE No.2A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDURU, BENGALURU – 560 103 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MR SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL 10. M/S TATA SKY LIMITED UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR, WINDSOR OFFICE, CST ROAD, KALINA SANTACURZ (EAST), MUMBAI – 400 098 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR BHARATH VASANI 11. YOU TUBE LLC GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, No.3 SWAMI VIVEKANANDA ROAD, - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS SADANANADANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU – 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 12. FACE BOOK INDIA ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI – 400 051 ALSO AT: HYDERABAD OFFICE BUILDING No.20, RAHEJA MIND SPACE, K.RAHEJA IT PARK, HITECH CITY ROAD, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA – 500 081 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 13. BIG FLIX, 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VEERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 14. DISNEY HOTSTAR, M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PVT LTD., URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG, RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 15. M/S EROS NOW 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING, OFFICE CEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, KISHORE LULLA. 16. M/S MX PLAYER 2ND FLOOR, WING A KANAKIA WALLSTREET, - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MAHENDRA SONI 17. M/S AMAZON PRIME, KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 18. YUPP TV 38-40, PLOT No.3, IONIDEA BUILDING, EPIP AREA, BENGALURU – 560 066 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, RAJESH KAMAT. 19. NAMMA FLIX, No.24, MY WORK AREA, BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU – 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 20. SUN NEXT No.9, MARAM TOWERS, BRUNTON ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 025 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 21. ZEE-5 KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, REGIONAL OFFICE, No.39, UNITED MANSION, 3RD FLOOR, MG ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 22. RAJ MUSIC KANNADA, RAJ KANNADA MUSIC CHANNEL, FLAT No.16/1, KKMP, MILLER TANK BUND ROAD, VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 23. LAHARI RECORDING COMPANY PVT LTD., 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 24. PUBLIC MUSIC, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR RANGANATH H R 25. STAR SUVARNA KANNADA CHANNEL STAR INDIA PVT LTD., No.66, LAKE VIEW BUILIDNG, BAGMANE TECH PARK, A BLOCK, 7TH FLOOR, CV RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 093 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 26. HOT STAR, STAR INDIA PVT LTD., No.66, LAKE VIEW BUILDING, BAGMANE TECH PARK, A BLOCK, 7TH FLOOR, CV RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 093 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 27. SHEMAROO ENTERTAIN LIMITED SHEMAROO HOUSE, FLAT No.18, MAROLCO-OP-INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OFF. ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI – 400 059 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 28. JHANKAR MUSIC, FLAT No.53/A, GROUND FLOOR, KHADI COMMISSION HBCS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, KATARI GUPPE MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 085 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 29. TELEGRAM 23RD FLOOR, BUSINESS CENTRAL TOWERS, TOWER-A, 1003-1004, DUBAI MEDIA CITY, DUBAI – 501 919 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C. M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 25.08.2022 NOTICE TO R2 TO R29 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED IN OS.NO. 25863/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 OF CPC., 7 RULE 1 OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 122/2022 BETWEEN: 1. M/S VIACOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT, JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (LEGAL AND CONTENT REGULATION), MR.SUGHOSH NIGALE 2. VOOT, AN OTT PLATFORM OF M/S VIACOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, ZION BIZWORLD, SUBHASH ROAD – A, VILE PARLE (EAST), MUMBAI – 400 057, MAHARASHTRA, REPRESENTED BY MR. SUGHOSH NIGALE ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHYAM SUNDAR H. V., ADVOCATE) - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AND: 1. KARNATAKA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, No.1023/138, SV TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. 2. UDAYA T.V. (SUN NETWORK) M/S SUN TV NETWORK LIMITED, AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT No.9, MARAM TOWERS, BRUTON ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 025. CORPORATE OFFICE: MURASOLI MARAN TOWERS, 73, MRC NAGAR MAIN ROAD, MRC CHENNAI – 600 028 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAHESH KUMAR R., 3. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO.NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT No.39, UNITED MANSION, 3RD FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. CORPORATE AND REGISTERED OFFICE: 18TH FLOOR, A WING, MARATHON FUTUREX, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SUBHASH CHANDRA. 4. SUVARNA TV (ASIANET EARLIER) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, HAVING OFFICE AT No.36 SHIVANANDA CIRCLE, OPPOSITE MALLIEGE HOSPITAL, CRESENT ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 5. KASTHURI MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 'KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARSWAMY, DIRECTOR. 6. PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER’S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR RANGANATH H.R. 7. PUBLIC TV/PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT. LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR RANGANATH H.R. 8. SIRI KANNADA No.1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL, 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 9. ANAND AUDIO VIDEO MI-M10, WHITE HOUSE, No.23/29, ST.MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. - 23 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 10. M/S SRI. GANESH VIDEO No.1, SRI.CHAMUNDESHWARI COMPLEX, SP ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 11. JIO MOVIES RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HITAL R. MESWANI. 12. AIRTEL EXTREAM, M/S BHARATI AIRTEL LIMITED, UNITECH WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR – 122 001. BENGALURU OFFICE: No.2A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDURU, BENGALURU – 560 103. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MR.SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL. 13. M/s TATA SKY LIMITED, UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR, WINDSOR OFFICE CST ROAD, KALINA SANTACRUZ (EAST), MUMBAI – 400 098 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, BHARATH VASANI. 14. YOU TUBE LLC, GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, No.3, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA ROAD, SADANANADANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU – 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. - 24 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 15. FACE BOOK INDIA. ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI – 400 051. ALSO AT: HYDERABAD OFFICE, BUILDING No.20, RAHEJA MIND SPACE, K.RAJEJA IT PARK, HITECH CITY ROAD, HUYDERABAD, TALANGANA – 500 081 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 16. BIG FLIX, 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VEERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTIAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 17. DISNEY HOTSTAR, M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PVT LTD., URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG, RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 18. M/s EROS NOW, 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING, OFFICE VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, KISHORE LULLA. 19. M/s MX PLAYER, 2ND FLOOR, WING A, KANAKIA WALLSTREET, VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MAHENDRA SONI. - 25 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 20. M/S AMAZON PRIME KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 21. YUPP TV 38-40, PLOT No.3, IONIDEA BUILDING, EPIP AREA, BENGALURU – 560 066 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, RAJESH KAMAT. 22. NAMMA FLIX, No.24, MY WORK AREA, BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU – 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C.M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 25.08.2022 NOTICE TO R2 TO R22 ARE DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED IN OS.NO. 25749/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 OF CPC., 7 RULE 1 OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 215/2022 BETWEEN: M/S. TATA PLAY LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TATA SKY LTD) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT, UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR, WINDSOR OFF, C.S.T. ROAD, KALIN, SANTACRUZ (EAST), MUMBAI – 400 098. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. GYALTSEN G. BARFUNGPA ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA H., ADVOCATE) - 26 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS AND: 1. KANNADA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION NO.1023/138, S.V. TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SR. D.K. RAMAKRISHNA 2. UDAYA T V (SUN NETWORK) M/S SUN TV NETWORK LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS R ELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT NO.09 MARAN TOWERS, BRUNTON ROAD, CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOKNAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATAKA – 560 025 ALSO AT OFFICE: MURASOLI MARAN TOWERS 73, MRC NAGAR MAIN ROAD, MRC NAGAR, CHENNAI – 600 028 REP. BY R. MAHESH KUMAR, MANAGING DIRECTOR 3. M/S VIACOM18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMTED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS RD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY SUDHANSHU VATS, MANAGING DIRECTOR 4. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO. NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE, NO. 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR M.G. ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560 001 - 27 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS ALSO AT: 18TH FLOOR, A – WING, MARATHON FUTUREX LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY SUBHASH CHANDRA, CHAIRMAN 5. SUVARNA TV (ASIANET EARLIER) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT NO.36, SHIVANANDA CIRCLE, OPP. MALLIGE HOSPITAL, CRESENT ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR/CHAIRMAN 6. KASTHURI MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARSWAMY, DIRECTOR. 7. PUBLIC MOVIES, PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENT ED BY RANGANATH H R CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 8. PUBLIC TV/ PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT LTD., AND ALL ITS SISTER'S CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT, 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY RANGANATH H R CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR - 28 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 9 SIRI KANNADA No.1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL, 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 10. ANAND AUDIO VIDEO MI-M10, WHITE HOUSE, No.23/29, ST.MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 11. M/S SRI. GANESH VIDEO No.1, SRI.CHAMUNDESHWARI COMPLEX, SP ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 12. JIO MOVIES RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS HITAL R. MESWANI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 13. AIRTEL EXTREAM, M/S BHARATI AIRTEL LIMITED, UNITECH WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR – 122 001. ALSO AT: No.2 A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDURU, BENGALURU – 560 103. REPRESENTED BY MR.SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL, CHAIRMAN - 29 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 14. YOU TUBE LLC, GOOGLE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, No.3, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA ROAD, SADANANADANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU – 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 15. FACE BOOK INDIA. ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI – 400 051. ALSO AT:, BUILDING No.20, RAHEJA MIND SPACE, K.RAJEJA IT PARK, HITECH CITY ROAD, HYDERABAD, TALANGANA – 500 081 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 16. BIG FLIX, 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VEERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTIAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 17. DISNEY HOTSTAR, M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PVT LTD., URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG, RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY UDAY SHANKAR PRESIDENT 18. M/s EROS NOW, 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING, OFFICE VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053 REPRESENTED BY KISHORE LULLA, EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN - 30 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 19. M/s MX PLAYER, MX PLAYER, 2ND FLOOR, WING A, KANAKIA WALLSTREET, VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY MAHENDRA SONI, DIRECTOR 20. VOOT M/S. VIACOM18 MEDIA PVT. LTD. ZION BIZWORLD, SUBHASH RD-A, VILE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 057, MAHARASHTRA, REPRESENTED BY RAHUL JOSHI, MANAGING DIRECTOR 21. M/S AMAZON PRIME KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 22. YUPP TV 38-40, PLOT No.3, IONIDEA BUILDING, EPIP AREA, BENGALURU – 560 066 REPRESENTED BY RAJESH KAMAT, DIRECTOR 23. NAMMA FLIX, No.24, MY WORK AREA, BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU – 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRANAV KUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 11.07.2023 NOTICE TO R3 TO R23 IS DISPENSED WITH) - 31 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED IN OS No.25749/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11 OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 218/2022 BETWEEN: M/S. TATA PLAY LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TATA SKY LTD) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT, UNIT 301 TO 305, 3RD FLOOR WINDSOR OFF, C.S.T. ROAD, KALINA, SANTACRUZ (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 098 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR GYALTSEN G BARFUNGPA ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KANNADA FILM PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, OFFICE AT NO. 1023/138, S.V. TOWERS, 28TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, WOC ROAD BENGALURU – 560 010 BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI. D.K. RAMAKRISHNA 2. M/S VIACOM18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMTED COLORS KANNADA (EARLIER ETV) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: JP TECHNO PARK, 3/2, 5TH FLOOR, MILLERS RD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY SUDHANSHU VATS, MANAGING DIRECTOR - 32 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 3. ZEE TV KANNADA (ZEE ENTERTAINMENT CO. NETWORK) AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE, NO. 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR M.G. ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560 001 4. SUVARNA T V (ASIANET EARLIER) AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT NO. 36, SHIVANANDA CIRCLE, OPP: MALLIGE HOSPITAL, CRESCENT ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 RERPESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 5. KASTHURI MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTER CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT ADDRESS: KASTURBA ROAD, SHANTHALA NAGAR, SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ANITHA KUMARASWAMY, DIRECTOR 6. PUBLIC MOVIES PUBLIC TV WRITEMEN MEDIA PVT. LTD. AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REPRESENTED BY H R RANGANATH, CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 7. PUBLIC TV / PUBLIC MOVIES M/S WRITMEN MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED AND ALL ITS SISTERS CONCERNS RELATED TO KANNADA ENTERTAINMNET 4TH FLOOR, TTMC BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR - 33 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS BENGLAURU – 560 022 RERPESENTED BY H R RANGANATH CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 8. SIRI KANNADA NO. 1031, ABOVE SIDVIN HOSPITAL 20TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK JEDARAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 9. JIO MOVIES RMZ ICON, CUNNINGHAM ROD, BANGLAORE – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY HITAL R. MESWANI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 10. AIRTEL EXTREAM M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED UNITED WORLD CYBER PARK, SECTOR – 39, TOWER A, 4TH FLOOR, GURGOAN – 122 001, HARYANA, DELHI AND NCR, ALSO AT: NO.2 A, 1ST FLOOR, PRESTIGE TECHNOLOGY PARK, JUPITER BLOCK, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE – 560 103, REPRESENTED BY MR. SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL, CHAIRMAN 11. YOUTUBE LLC GOOGLE INDIA PVT. LTD. 4TH FLOOR, TOWER E, RMZ INFINITY, NO.3, SWAMI VIVKANANDA RD, SADANANDANAGAR, BENNIGANA HALLI, BENGALURU – 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN - 34 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 12. FACE BOOK INDIA ONE BKC, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI, INDIA – 400 051, ALSO AT: FACEBOOK HYDERABAD OFFICE BUILDING NO.20, RAHEJA MINDSPACE, K. RAHEJA I.T. PARK, HITECH CITY ROAD, VITTAL RAO NAGAR, HITEC CITY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA – 500 081, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 13. BIG FLIX 15TH FLOOR, GRANDEUR, VERA DESAI EXT ROAD, CAPTAIN SAWANT MARG, NEAR COUNTRY CLUB, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI – 400 053, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 14. DISNEY HOTSTAR M/S NOVI DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, URMI ESTATE, GANAPATRAO KADAM MARG RAILWAY COLONY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI, MAHARSTRA – 400 013 REPRESENTED BY UDAY SHANKAR, PRESIDENT 15. M/S EROS NOW 501, SUPREME CHAMBER BUILDING OFF VEERA DESAI ROAD, ANDHERI WEST, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA – 400 053 REPRESETNED BY KISHORE LULLA EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN 16. M/S MX PLAYER MX PLAYER, 2ND FLOOR WING A, KANKIA WALL STREET, VILLAGE CHAKALA, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST, - 35 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS MUMBAI – 400 093 REPRESENTED BY MAHENDRA SONI, DIRECTOR 17. VOOT M/S VICOM 18 MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ZION BIZWORLD, SUBHASH ROAD – A, VILE PARLE (EAST) MUMBAI – 400 057 MAHARASTRA REP. BY RAHUL JOSHI, MANAGING DIRECTOR 18. M/S AMAZON PRIME KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA REP. BY ITS MANAING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 19. YUPPTV 38-40, PLOT # 3, IONIDEA BUILDING, EPIP AREA, BENGALURU – 560 066, REPRESENTED BY RAJESH KAMAT, DIRECTOR 20. NAMMA FLIX NO. 24, MY WORK AREA BENAKA COMPLEX, 2ND CROSS, SIRUR PARK ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGLAORE – 560 020 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 21. SUN NEXT NO 9, MARAN TOWERS BRUNTON ROAD, CRIAG PARK LAYOUT, ASHOK NAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATALA – 560 025 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN - 36 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 22. ZEE-5 KANNADA ENTERTAINMENT REGIONAL OFFICE NO 39, UNITED MANSIONS, 3RD FLOOR, M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 23. RAJ MUSIC KANNADA RAJ KANNDA MUSIC CHANNEL FALT NO 16/1, KKMP MILLERS TANK BUND ROAD VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 24. LAHARAI RECORDING COMPANY PVT. LTD. 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, YEHSWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 560 022 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 25. PUBLIC MUSIC 4TH FLOOR, TTMC-BMTC BUILDING, YESHWANTHPUR CILRCE, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGLAURU – 560 022 REP. BY H. R. RANGAANTH CHARIMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR 26. STAR SUVARNA KANNADA CHANNEL STAR INDIA PVT. LTD., NO.66, LAKE VIEW BUILDING, BAGMANE TECH PARK, A BLOCK, 7TH FLOOR, CV RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 093 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR / CHAIRMAN 27. HOTSTAR STAR INDIA PVT. LTD. NO.66, LAKE VIEW BUILDING BAGMANE TECH PARK, A BLOCK , 7TH FLOOR, C V RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 093 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN - 37 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 28. SHERMAROO ENTERTAIN LTD., SHEMAROO HOUSE, FLAT NO 18, MAROLCO-OP- INDUSTRIAL ESTATE OFF ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI EAST MUMBAI – 400 059, REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 29. JHANKAR MUSIC FLAT NO.53/A, GROUND FLOOR, KHADI COMMISSION HBCS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, KATARAI GUPPE MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 085 REP. BY ITS MANGING DIRECTOR / CHARIMAN 30. TELEGRAM 23RD FLOOR, BUSINESS CENTRAL TOWERS TOWR A, 1003-1004, DUBAI MEDIA CITY, DUBAI – 501 919 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C. M., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. PRANAV KUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R21; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.10.2022 NOTICE TO R2 TO R20, R22 TO R30 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2021 PASSED IN OS No.25863/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11 OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. THESE PETITIONS ARE BEING HEARD AND RESERVED ON 25.10.2025 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- - 38 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CAV ORDER All these petitions arise out of common order dated 21.10.2021 passed in O.S.No.25863/2020 by the LVII Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore, whereby identical / similar applications filed by the petitioners who are defendants 1, 2, 3, 10, 15, 16, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28 and 29 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint was dismissed by the trial court. 2. Since common questions of law and fact arise for consideration in the suit, out of which, the present petitions arise, coupled with the fact that the trial court has passed the impugned common order which is assailed in all the petitions, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order. 3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petitions are as under:- The 1st respondent in all the petitions is the plaintiff in the suit claiming to be the Karnataka Film Producers Association which instituted the aforesaid suit for permanent injunction restraining the - 39 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS petitioners – defendants and other defendants from infringing, exhibiting, telecasting etc., the movies mentioned in the schedule to the plaint and for other reliefs. The said suit is being contested by the defendants who also filed the instant applications seeking rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 (a) and (d) CPC. The plaintiff having filed objections to the said applications, the trial court proceeded to pass the impugned common order rejecting all the applications filed by the petitioners - defendants 1, 2, 3, 10, 15, 16, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28 and 29, who are before this Court by way of the present petitions. 4. Heard Sri.S.S.Naganand, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and learned Sri.V.Lakshminarayana, learned Senior counsel for the 1st respondent as well as other learned counsel for remaining respondents and perused the material on record. 5. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the trial court committed an error in failing to consider and appreciate that the plaintiff which was not the owner or licencee of the copyright was not entitled to - 40 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS maintain the suit which was not maintainable in view of Sections 54 and 55 r/w Section 61(1) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (for short ‘the said Act of 1957’) and the plaint was liable to be rejected. It was contended that the plaintiff did not have locus standi to institute the suit since civil remedies for infringement of copyright can be initiated only by the Producers who were the alleged owners of the alleged copyright and the plaintiff who did not have any personal interest over the subject matter of the suit were not entitled to institute or prosecute the suit for permanent injunction which was specifically barred under Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. It was also submitted that apart from the fact that the plaintiff was not a registered copyright society as contemplated under Section 33 of the said Act of 1957, the plaintiff being a private association allegedly registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act was not entitled to sue for copyright infringement which can be instituted only by the Producers who were the alleged owners of the copyright as per the averments made in the plaint. 5.1 Learned Senior counsel would elaborate his arguments and submit that in addition to the fact that the Producers of the plaint schedule films had not been arrayed / impleaded as parties to - 41 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS the suit, despite being both proper and necessary parties, the plaint does not reveal / disclose a cause of action and in contravention of Section 61 of the said Act of 1957. It was pointed out that the trial court erred in placing reliance on certain letters / complaints said to have been written by the Producers to the plaintiff without appreciating that the suit said to have been filed by the President of the plaintiff - Association was contrary to the Byelaws of the Association and the suit being bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of parties and causes of action was liable to be dismissed. It was therefore submitted that the trial court had not considered all these aspects while passing the impugned order which is contrary to law and facts and the same was liable to be rejected. In support of his submissions, learned Senior counsel places reliance upon the following judgments:- (i) Achla Sabharwal v. National Film Development Corp. Ltd. And Anr - 2017 SCC OnLine Del 12009; (ii) Jorden Electronics and Anr.v. Bombino Video (P) Ltd., - 2007 (98) DRJ 218; (iii) The Periyar Self Respect Propaganda Institution v. Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam - (2010) 2 CTC 365; - 42 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS (iv) Dahiben vs. Aravindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali & Ors - 2020 (7) SCC 366; (v) Shivnarayan (D) by Lrs. V. Maniklal (D) Thr.Lrs. and Others - 2019 SCC OnLine SC 136; (vi) Chowdri Kalyan Chand & Ors vs. V.R. Dwaraknath & Ors - 2005 SCC OnLine AP 835; (vii) Mumbai Internataional Airport Private Limited vs. Regency Convention Centre and Hotels Pvt Ltd - (2010) 7 SCC 417; (viii) Masina sriramulu vs. Pasagadagula Pydaiah & Anr - 2011 SCC OnLine AP 91. 6. Per contra, learned Senior counsel for the 1st respondent would support the impugned order and submit that for the purpose of considering an application for rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, it was only the plaint averments and documents produced along with it that were relevant and germane and neither the written statement or documents filed by the defendants nor their application or affidavit under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC could be looked into for the purpose of considering rejection of plaint and as such, the trial court correctly rejected the applications filed by the defendants. It was submitted that apart from the fact that the plaint clearly disclose a cause of action, the plaintiff – Association which was duty bound to institute the suit on behalf of its members / - 43 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS Producers who were owners of the copyrights in respect of the plaint schedule movies had filed the suit on their behalf which was permissible under the Byelaws / Memorandum of Articles of Association of the plaintiff in order to protect the interest of its members. It was therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by the trial court does not warrant interference by this Court the present petitions, which were liable to be dismissed. In support of his submissions, learned Senior counsel for the 1st respondent places reliance upon the following judgments: (i) Vallabh Das vs. Dr.Madan Lal & others – (1970) 1 SCC 761: (ii) Exphar SA vs. Eupharma Laboratories Limited – (2004) 3 SCC 688; (iii) M/s.Lahari Recording Company Pvt. Ltd., vs. M/s. Sourabh Marketing and Agencies Pvt. Ltd., - ILR 2000 KAR 5057. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 8. Before adverting to the rival contentions, it would be necessary to extract the plaint averments and the reliefs sought for by the plaintiffs which are as under:- - 44 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS “ PLAINT UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 26 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 The plaintiff submits as follows: 1.The address of the plaintiff for the purpose of summons, notice of this Hon'ble Court is as shown in the cause title above and also that of their counsels M/s. Dhananjaya Associates, Chambers at "Leela Karan" No.227, 13th Cross, 5th Main, 2nd Stage, Indiranagar, Bengaluru - 560 038. 2.The addresses of the defendants for purposes of court notices and process are as shown in the cause title. 3. The plaintiff is the registered association known as Kannda Film Producers Association having its registered office at No.1023/138, S. V. Towers, 28th Main Road, 5th Block, WOC Road, Bangalore 560 010. The object of the said association is to promote unity among Kannada Film Producers, maintain standard, to protect and promote the privileges of members for their benefits and to do all such other things as or incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects. A copy of the registration certificate of the plaintiff association and bye law are produced herewith as DOCUMENT NO.1 and 2. 4. The defendants are running television channels and on-line streaming platforms which are telecasted all over the world. There are millions of viewers of the said TV Channels and streaming media services. 5. All the Kannada Film Producers are the members of the plaintiff association. Any grievance of the producers are met, resolved are agitated through the association on - 45 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS common consent of such producers. The letters issued by the producers are collectively produced herewith as DOCUMENT NO. 3. 6. The various producers enlisted hereunder have approached the plaintiff association with their representations contending that, the defendants arc telecasting, streaming, broadcasting through satellites, internet and over-the-top media services(OTT Media Service). The said OTT bypasses cable, broadcast and satellites television platforms. 7. The list of producers and their respective production movies are as follows :- SL NO Name of Production / Producer Name of the Movies 1. Ekadantha Productions Ekadantha 2. Shree Pavamana Arts Mr. Theertha 3. Vidya Pictures News 4. Vidya Productions Nandi 5. Super Good Combines Punda Indra Sye 6. Sri Jai Bhuvaneshwari Arts Emergency Kalabhairava MaryadeRamanna 7. V M Productions Sulthan 8. 4D Creations Psycho 9. Super Good Combines O Nanna Nalle Veera Ranachandi 10. Lakshmi Venkateshwara Creation Antharya 11. INDO US Film Productions Arivina Mane 12. Srinivasa Productions Prajaprabhutva Indian Rough And Tough 13. Ullas Enterprises Majestic 14. UllasProductions Shishya 15. Ullas Creations Magadi 16. Jyothi Pictures Puttamalli 17. Suryaa Films Hudugigaagi 18. Jyothi Shri Productions Acharya 19. Ranjith Production's BombatRaja Bandal Rani 20. Srinivasa Productions Dhairya Zindabad The City Upendra Thimma Puttsamy ThavarinaTheru Lady Police Romio Juliet Parva Valmiki - 46 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 21. Super Hit Productions LoveaIlla Doveaa Sundara Kanye 22. Adrushta Combines Kaldogbitte 23. C.L.S Productions Avale Nanna Hudugi 24. Rajalakshmi Art Films BanniOndsala Nodi 25. Sree Shakti Productions Inspector Kranthi Kumar Aasha Shankar Sundar Yetu Yeduretu Dada Devara Mane 26. Sri Sanjeevini Cine Creations Agamya 27. SF Combines Surya Eva Vrukshamithra 28. Sri ParameshwariAarts Ardaangi Tharangini Bbete 29. Sri LakshmisaiCreeators Neelambari 30. Om Balaji Enterprises Taarakaasura 31. MahashailaCinebandha Shrikanta 32. MahashailaCiniSankula Chingari 33. Kamakshi Enterprises Tada Khaidi Brahma Vishnu 34. Vaishnavi Visions Mani 35. Sai Sri Enterprises Bhddivantha Mohini 36. Sai Sri Enterprises Priyanka ThipparalliTharlegalu 37. Siddalingeswar Ananthara 38. Jayanna Films Arjun Rustum 39. Lakshmi Vinayaka Entertainments Jootaata 40. Sri Maruthi Film Creation Udees 41. Sreekantesha Films EstuNagthiNagu 42. Jayanna Combines Mufti Saheba Bangara S/O Bangaradamanushya Jai Maruthi 800 Boxer Ranavikrama Bullet Basya Ranavikrama Mr And MrsRamachari Gajakessari KwatleSathisa Dyavre Googly Drama Jaanu Paramathma Johnny 43. Premier Cini Technical Associates SwargadalliMaduve 44. Megha Star Creations KarunadaHuliMailarMahade va Dil 45. Best Films Nagavalli, Marikannu Hori Mele 46. Pushpa Productions Geetha 47. Padmavathi Art Productions AataBobata 48. ShaswathiChithra ChiraBandhavya Savya Saachi 49. Padmashree Enterprises SampathigaySaval Girikanye - 47 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 50. TanuChitra BhandaAllaBahaddur Bhagavan Chandu Gunna Jaidev Jaana Kanasugara Minchina Ota Muthu Ranganna Veeranna BombatHuduga Belli Kalungara YeluSuthinaKote 51. Mysore Dream Merchents Rebel 52. Sri TulujaBhavani Excuse Me Chappale 7 O' Clock ThananamThananam Karanji CheluveyeNinnaNodalu 53. Sri TulujaBhavani Adwaitha 54. Rohini Pictures MalligeHoove Muthina Haara Bannada Hejje Bandana Kaliyuga Thirugu Baana 55. Lakshmi Entertainers Pvt Ltd Aadi Madana 56. JJ Productions Vare Vah 57. Arpitha Arts Rani Maharani 58. Jai Lakshmi Productions KallaMalla 59. Siri Vaibhav Nidhi Productions O Premave 60. Dakshath Combines Male Barali E Bandana 61. Vaibhav Lakshmi Productions MungarinaMinchu Kalyanothsava BhoomithayiyaChochalama ga 62. Lakshmi Creations Kurigalu Saar Kurigalu Kanchana Ganga Kothigalu Saar 63. K.S.N Movies BaadadaHoo 64. A N S Prdcutions Swabhimana HenneNinagenuBhandana AnjadaGandu DaivaShakthi 65. S.D.M Films Mister Harishchandra Ellara Mane Dosenu YarigeSalatteSambla 66. Sri Lakshmi Productions Kanasina Rani Naginee 67. Sri Lakshmi Productions Pugasatte Ganda HottetumbaUnda Trinetra Challenge Sthree Baaro Nanna Muddina Krishna 68. A N S Productions Dharmapathni MrRaaja PreethiMaadoHudugarigella Sachin Tendulkar Alla RamaswamiKrishnaswami Khalanayaka 69. Sri Sai Ram Pictures Shathru 70. Shree Shirdi Sai Films Inspector Jayasimha Border - 48 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 71. Simran Movie Makers Dragon 72. Shree Laxmivenkateshwaraa Enterprises Supari 73. Simhaadri Productions Nanda Loves Nandhitha Mahakaali Mari Tiger Bhagath 74. Sri Renukamba Cine Picture Nidhi 75. Vijay Films Ellaranthalla Nanna Ganda MuddinaMaava Narasimha SolilladaSaradara 76. Vijay Films Anna Thangi Lava Kusha Tumbida Mane 77. Vijay Films Avale Nanna Hendthi Avane Nanna Ganda 78. S.R.K Pictures YeddideGaddala 79. RSS Cine Creations GandadaGombe Rajanna 80. Brindavan Enterprises 2nd Half Nam Gani 81. Sri Srinivasa Art Films Target 82. S P Films Police Dog 83. Kavi Creators Romanchana Yagna Kanye Real Real 84. Tirumala Cine Productions Goodluck Tharkasha 85. S.N.S. Productions Adrusta Rekhe 86. UPPI Entertainers 'A' 87. SURAAG Films Number One 90 88. J.J. Internationals Dhani, Mangala Sutra Yajamana Huccha, Ninne Preethisuve, Maduve mane 89. SVR Family Trust Sowbhagyalakshmi, Dallalli, MadagdunnuMaaraya Bhaktacheta Sri Dharmastalamahathme Bangaradakalla MadeshwaraPoojapala Ondekulaonde Daiva Nagakanye Killadi Jodi DhanaPichachi 90. Realwealth Productions KaravaliHudugi Mr. Duplicate 91. Karnatakaa Talkies Modalaasala, 92. Sri Raghavendra Films Kanoonu, Muddina Aliya Huliya, Goldmedal 93. Yogesh Motion Pictures Eradanesala 94. A-Entertainers Hagaluvesha 95. Sri Devi Films Ashoka Chakra 96. Mythri Syndicate Hoo Male 97. Sri JyothiChitralaya Central Jail, Srirampura Police Station Ticket Tickets 98. Samyuktha Creations Pratyartha - 49 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 99. Amrutha Arts Karna Krishan nee BeganeBaaro Brahma Vishnu Maheshwara, ManeyeManthralaya, Yugapurusha, 100. SVR Movies Bheems Bang Bang Kids. 101. Sai Jyothi Creations D.K Ramakrishna Karphyu Nishchithartha 102. Sri Devamma Productions Rangenahalliyage Rangada Rangegowda, Hai Bengaluru Karnataka Police 103. ManasaChitra Mahrshi Manasina Mathu 104. MRK Films Obavva 105. Shivashankara Cine Production AA Rathri Nammura Ramayana 106. Bhagyashree Cine Combines Kadlimatti station Master, Vijaya Kankana Katheyada Kala YelukotinMarthandaByrava Holi O Prema Devathe 107. Enterprise Entertainment Rasa Rushi Kuvempu 108. Sree Jayalakshmi Pictures KrishnaMechida Radhe 109. Namana Films Darshan’Shastri Snehana Prethina Nandaadeepa Sugreeva Jaaji Mallige Bheema Theeradalli Jokali Golmal 110. Vasushri Productions Encounter Dayanayak Dharma Gnage Baare ThungeBaare 111. Chitra Kuteera Aitha Lakkadi 112. Sri Channigaraya Swamy Combines Gokula Krishna 113. Ullas Enterprises Mejestic 114. Bangalore Cinema Singapuradalli Shambu – Linga Ranachandi Pathanga 115. Movie Magix Crime Story 116. Creative Visuals Live Band Mast Mast Hudgi bandlu Anubandha Viplava Sammilana 117. Celluloid Creations Mysore Dasara Varabekagide Malegala 118. Jayachandra Productions Yaaru Chaithra 119. Film Shopp Mooru Manasu Shodha 120. BRK's Mega Productions Narahanthaka Naandi Rhythm Naraka Naana Hendthi Kole 121. SS Combines Ee Shathamanada Veera- Madakari Hoo Mallikarjuna Chatrapathi - 50 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 8. The producers have obtained respective clearance from the Central Board of Film Certification in respect of the above movies respectively. The said movies are more specifically described hereunder and hereinafter referred to as schedule movies. The producers of the above movies have made substantial investment in terms of time, skill, labour and money for picturaization of above films respectively. The producers also incurred considerable expenses in equipment, actors, staff, production facilities and several other incidental expenditures. The exhibition of films in theaters, through televisions, video disks, cassettes, internet to the general public and are the primary source of earnings of the producers. The producers would be able to recover its investments largely by selling exclusive rights to parties such as defendants herein. Copies of the certificates issued by the Central Board of Film Certification, the Government of India are collectively produced herewith as DOCUMENT No. 4. 9. The producers having produced the above movies and have sold their limited rights for exploiting the cinematograph films to the distributors for exhibition of same in cinema theaters for commercial / non-commercial by reserving their right to sell the same any other purchasers for exhibition of the films to Television Media, Internet Media, Satellite Media and the Over-the-top Media Services (OTT). 10. The producers named herein above are the exclusive owners of the cinematograph films detailed in the schedule hereunder respectively and owners of copyright over the said movies. - 51 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 11. The defendants having no right over the said films to telecast and exploit the same have been telecasting and exploiting the pictures, songs, scenes and clippings, without authorization, consent or contract with the producers of the Even some defendants have been telecasting the same. The streaming media has kept it open repeatedly to its members to view and cause copies of those watching later or enabling others to watch or further copy that film by downloadingand linking the said movies without process streaming restrictions. By exploiting the said movies, the defendants are cinematography of making huge profits without sharing the / any same to the any right, producers.The producers have not provided assigned copyright for broadcasting of the said movies by Satellite Transmission Rights, Internet Media Service orOver-the-top Media Services (OTT). As such the defendants have no manner of right to exploit the said films either through Television Satellite Transmission Rights, Internet Media Service or Over-the-top Media Services (OTT) or any other mode without the permission / consent / contract with the producers of the respective films. 12. The producers of the respective films have noticed the telecast or exploitation of the respective movies during the period of lock down due to epidemic COVID-19 i.e., from March, 2020. The producers were surprised to see their movies being listed for watching to its viewers. The Plaintiff has to get verified and investigated since when the Defendants are telecasting their movies and get estimated damages due the Defendants. The defendants have no right to exploit the said movies either through website, OTT, App - 52 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS or any other mode without consent and permission or any contract with the producers of the respective movies. The said exhibition / exploitation amounts to infringement of copyright of the producers towards their respective movies. The Defendants are not authorized or assigned the broadcast rights such as TV, Satellite, Video, Doordarshan, Cable and other rights. Further the Plaintiff has not given negatives (both picture and sound) to the Defendants. The said illegal and unlawful acts of the defendants have to be restrained by an order of permanent injunction. 13. The defendants' television channels, websites, apps and links are primarily and substantially engaged in exploiting the films to the public, by streaming and / or making available to public the original content without authorization of the same. Due to the illegal acts and conduct of the defendants, the producers are suffering huge losses. However, the producers reserve their right to claim damages. The producers of films are covered under Section 2(1) of the Copyrights Act and they are entitled to all rights and protections granted under the Section 13, 14, 17 of the Act for Cinematograph Films. The producers of the first owner of the film and they are entitled to protection under the Act. In order to protect the right of the producers the producers have monitored the defendants' channels, websites and apps and gathered evidence of their infringement activity. Copies of printouts of the defendants' apps, websites, advertisements of the availability of above listed movies in their respective channel, website are produced herewith as DOCUMENT No. 5. - 53 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 14. The plaintiff submits that, on a of the producers herein above Mr. Narasimhamurthyhas also lodged police complaint against the defendant No. 14 and 19 and others with West Central Crime Police Station, Bengaluru for infringement of copyright of his movie named as "Mumtaz" on 30.06.2020 and same is registered in Crime No.745/2020. A copy of the FIR is produced herewith as DOCUMENT NO.6. 15. The Plaintiff submits that the Plaintiff Association had filed O.S. No. 25749/2020 and the Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant Interim Order dated 07.07.2020. A copy of the said order is produced herewith as DOCUMENT No. 7. 16. If the defendants are not restraining with their appropriate order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from exhibiting / exploring, streaming, broadcasting, telecasting, hosting, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public or communicating to the public the above movies through Televisions, Satellite Telecast, through Internet, Website or through Over the top Media Services and from further infringing the producers' exclusive rights, over the movies listed in the schedule hereunder over which the producers have copyright, the defendants would continue the infringement of producers copyright. The plaintiff having no other alternate remedy has approached this Hon'ble Court seeking appropriate relief of injunction. 17. The cause of action for the above suit arose in March, 2020, when the producers of the films have noticed that the movies produced and owned by the producers are being unauthorizedly telecasted, streaming and exhibited by the defendants over their Television, Satellite, Website, Over - 54 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS the-top Media Services and on several other dates when the above mentioned movies are telecasted, made available for public view and on several other dates and within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. 18. The above movies are available on the Apps, Televisions, Websites of the defendants and available for viewers in Bengaluru as such the part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court and this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction for the same. 19. The plaintiff has not filed any other suits or proceedings before this Hon'ble Court or any other court on same cause of action. 20. The suit is valued for Rs. 1000/- under section 26(c) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act and accordingly court fees has been paid on the plaint. A separate valuation slip is annexed herewith. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff prays that, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant a judgment and decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, representatives, agents or anyone claiming under or on behalf of them from in any manner infringing, exhibiting, for viewing, " telecasting, streaming, making available downloading the movies mentioned in the schedule hereunder or any part thereof through satellite broadcast direct to home broadcast, direct satellite service, internet streaming through all forms, IP, Television, Broadband, Telephone, over the top media services or any other mode which may be in existence now or in future or through any other form of transmission of electro-magnetic waves of - 55 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS intended to be received by general public either directly or indirectly. And grant such other and relief as are just.” 9. As can be seen from the plaint averments, the plaintiff specifically contends that it is a registered Association having its own Byelaws, thereby indicating that undisputedly, the plaintiff – Association is an independent, juristic and legal entity which has instituted the suit in its own name through its President – Sri.D.K.Ramakrishna. It is also an undisputed fact that the various 121 Producers whose names are contained at paragraph – 7 of the plaint have not been impleaded as parties to the suit. Further, at paragraphs- 9 and 10 of the plaint, it is categorically stated that the aforesaid Producers are the owners of the copyright in respect of which, the plaintiff contends that there has been infringement by the defendants. At paragraphs 11 to 16, the plaintiff has put forth various averments and contentions wherein it is repeatedly reiterated that the copyright to the schedule films / movies were owned by the said Producers (not made parties to the suit) and that in order to protect their rights, the suit was filed for permanent injunction since the defendants were continuing to infringe the copyrights of the said Producers. In the cause of action column at - 56 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS paragraphs-17 of the plaint, plaintiff specifically states that the schedule movies were produced and owned by the Producers on whose behalf, the suit was being filed. Interestingly, in the entire plaint, plaintiff – Association does not claim to be the owner / licencee / exclusive licencee of the plaint schedule movies owned and possessed by the Producers (non – parties) whose copyrights are alleged to have been infringed by the defendants. 10. The aforesaid plaint averments and the documents produced along with the plaint are sufficient to come to the conclusion that even according to the plaintiff – Association, it was not the owner of the copyrights in relation to the plaint schedule movies which were owned and possessed exclusively by the Producers; so also, the plaintiff does not claimed to be a licencee or an exclusive licencee of the schedule copyrights; in this context, it is necessary to extract Sections 54 and 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957 which reads as under:- “ 54. Definition.— For the purposes of this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, the expression “owner of copyright” shall include— (a) an exclusive licensee; (b) in the case of an anonymous or pseudonymous literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work, the publisher of - 57 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS the work, until the identity of the author or, in the case of an anonymous work of joint authorship, or a work of joint authorship published under names all of which are pseudonyms, the identity of any of the authors, is disclosed publicly by the author and the publisher or is otherwise established to the satisfaction of the 1[Appellate Board] by that author or his legal representatives. 55. Civil remedies for infringement of copyright.— (1) Where copyright in any work has been infringed, the owner of the copyright shall, except as otherwise provided by this Act, be entitled to all such remedies by way of injunction, damages, accounts and otherwise as are or may be conferred by law for the infringement of a right: Provided that if the defendant proves that at the date of the infringement he was not aware and had no reasonable ground for believing that copyright subsisted in the work, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to any remedy other than an injunction in respect of the infringement and a decree for the whole or part of the profits made by the defendant by the sale of the infringing copies as the court may in the circumstances deem reasonable. (2) Where, in the case of a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work, 2[or, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 13, a cinematograph film or sound recording, a name purporting to be that of the author, or the publisher, as the case may be, of that work, appears] on copies of the work as published, or, in the case of an artistic work, appeared on the work when it was made, the person whose name so appears or appeared shall, in any proceeding in - 58 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS respect of infringement of copyright in such work, be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be the author or the publisher of the work, as the case may be. (3) The costs of all parties in any proceedings in respect of the infringement of copyright shall be in the discretion of the court.” 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provisions is sufficient to come to the conclusion that it is only the owner of a copyright who can maintain a suit for copyright infringement and a person who is neither the owner nor a licencee nor an exclusive licencee of a copyright does not have locus standi nor would be entitled to institute or maintain a suit for copyright infringement; in the instant cases, it is an undisputed fact as borne out from the material on record that the plaintiff is a registered Association which is an independent, legal and juristic entity which is separate and mutually exclusive from the Producers / members for the purpose of ownership of copyrights as contemplated under Sections 54 and 55 of the said Act of 1957. In other words, so long as the instant suit was not filed by the Producers who were the owners of the plaint schedule copyrights nor were they made party-defendants to the suit, the instant suit by the plaintiff who was not the owner of the - 59 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS plaint schedule copyrights was not entitled to institute or maintain the suit, which was clearly barred under Sections 54 and 55 of the said Act of 1957, thereby leading to the sole and unmistakable conclusion that the suit was not maintainable and the plaint was liable to be rejected. 12. In Achala Sabarwal’s case supra, the Delhi High Court held as under:- “ 11. In my opinion, the trial court has also rightly dismissed the suit by placing reliance upon Section 61 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and the spirit of which provision is that once there are disputes with respect to who was the actual owner of the copyright, then in such a case an owner of the copyright in the film as on 15.7.2007 ought to have been made party to the suit. In the present case, the last owner in the chain from whom the appellant/plaintiff purchased terrestrial rights in the film was M/s Spotlight, and therefore M/s Spotlight or actually M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. ought to have been made a party but since such entity was not made as a party defendant, the trial court was hence justified in holding the suit to be bad on account of non-joinder of necessary party in accordance with the spirit of Section 61 of the Copyright Act. The relevant observations of the trial court in this regard are contained in paras 11.7 to 11.10 of the impugned judgment and these paras read as under:— - 60 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS “11.7. Evident to note that the film was telecasted on 15.07.2007 on the offer made by M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd; the film was offered vide letter dated 31.05.2007 by the said firm; all the link and necessary documents are stated to have been provided by M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. to defendants; the royalty amount against the screening of the film was withheld after coming to know of the claim of the assignment rights by the plaintiff. These facts were well within the knowledge of the plaintiff at the time of filing of the present suit, therefore, when there was per-se dispute to the assignment of terrestrial rights between the plaintiff and the M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. in my considered view, M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. ought to have been arrayed as a defendant as a necessary party for complete and effective adjudication of the dispute herein. The outcome of the suit would have direct bearing of the legal rights of the M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd on whose offer the film was telecasted on Doordarshan by D-1. 11.8. Herein when the application for impleadment of M/s Mima Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. was moved on behalf of defendant no. 1 plaintiff had vehemently opposed the said application. I fail to understand why the plaintiff was shying away to add the M/s Mima Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. in the array of parties when admittedly there was a dispute between them regarding the assignment of terrestrial rights, more the so, when the film was telecasted on an offer not made by the plaintiff but by the M/s Mima Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. - 61 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 11.9. Further, a reference to Section 61 of the Copy Right Act would also be relevant which states that “In every civil suit or other proceedings regarding infringement of copyright instituted by an exclusive licensee, the owner of the copyright shall, unless the court otherwise directs, be made a defendant and where such owner is made a defendant, he shall have the right to dispute the claim of the exclusive licensee”. Plaintiff has neither impleaded the owners of the copy rights nor the assignees in the present case. Nor the leave of the court was taken in this regard. 11.10. Therefore, in light of my above discussion, I am of the view that the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties especially M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. and accordingly the issue is decided in favour of the defendant and against the plaintiff.” 12. Learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff argues that since the application to add M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. was dismissed by the trial court in terms of its order dated 26.4.2012, and therefore, now it could not be held that the suit is bad for nonjoinder of M/s Spotlight or M/s Mima Real Estate Advisors Pvt. Ltd. (now known as Mima Cinevision Pvt. Ltd.), however this argument is misconceived because even if an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC is dismissed, which was moved by the respondents/defendants, the same did not exempt the appellant/plaintiff from the requirement of complying with the spirit of Section 61 of the Copyright Act because after all the appellant/plaintiff has to prove her entitlement, to the royalty - 62 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS charges/telecast rights and such entitlement can only arise in case of a clear cut title of the subject film in favour of the appellant/plaintiff. Trial court rightly discusses this aspect for holding the same against the appellant/plaintiff as per para 11.8 of the impugned judgment and which para 11.8 is reproduced above. Appellant/plaintiff however has failed to do the needful and the trial court was therefore justified in dismissing the suit including on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.” 13. In Jorden Electronics case supra, the Delhi High Court held as under:- 2. The claim of the plaintiff is vehemently disputed by the defendant who has taken a strong objection even to the maintainability of the lis, as the suit has been filed without joining the producers of the films. The defendant has also set up a claim of having exclusive copyright in five of the films relying on agreements in its favour. 6. I find that the defendant is claiming subsisting and exclusive video rights in respect of only five films which are titled Arth, Jeete Hain Shaan Se, Sharara, Kalakaar and Ek Haseena Thi. The defendant is not claiming any rights in respect of the remaining eighteen films. It has also been stated that the defendant has not conducted any business in respect of these eighteen films. Consequently so far as the remaining eighteen films are concerned, the plaintiff has no cause of action against the defendant and the application and suit in respect thereof. With regard to the five films in - 63 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS which the defendant is claiming rights, Mr. Ravi Aggarwal, learned counsel for the defendant has urged that the plaintiff has no rights therein and for this reason the application merits dismissal.” 12. Be that as it may, the plaintiff has not been able to support that the agreement dated 16th September, 2004 was executed and the rights assigned in its favour by any authorised person on behalf of the producer. It is well settled that in order to be entitled to an injunction, the plaintiff has to establish a prima facie legal right to the same. In the absence of primafacie establishing that the agreement dated 16th September, 2004 in its favour had been executed by any person on behalf of the producer, the plaintiff would not be entitled to any injunction against the defendant even if the agreement infavour of the defendant stood cancelled. 27. The defendant has repeatedly pointed out the failure of the plaintiff to comply with the mandate of Section 61 of the Copyright Act, 1957 which requires that in every civil suit or other proceedings regarding infringement of copyright instituted by an exclusive licensee, the owner of the copyright would have the right to dispute the claim of the exclusive licensee. The plaintiff has failed to take any steps for impleading the producers and the owners of the copyright as parties to the present suit and would therefore be not entitled to injunction for this reason as well. 28. The defendants have placed reliance on the pronouncement reported on AIR 1997 Calcutta 63 Gramophone Company of India Limited v. Shanti Films - 64 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS Corporation & Ors. in support of its several contentions. This judgment also reiterates the principles which would guide the court while considering grant of injunction in respect of a contract entered into between parties whereby copyright was assigned in favour of one or the other party. 29. In the light of the foregoing discussion, in my view, the plaintiff has failed to make out a prima facie case for grant of interim protection so far as films Arth, Jeete Hai Shaan Se, Sharara, Kalakaar and Ek Hasina Thi are concerned, consequently requires to be rejected. The same therefore is hereby dismissed. So far as the remaining films are concerned, the defendant is not claiming any rights therein and therefore the apprehension of the plaintiff in respect thereof is misconceived. This application is dismissed with costs which are quantified at Rs.15,000/- The order dated 3rd August, 2005 granting an injunction against the defendant from manufacturing, selling, supplying the copies of 23 films mentioned in para 37 of the present application cannot be maintained and is hereby vacated.” 14. In Periar’s case supra, the Madras high Court held as under:- “ 1. Whether re-publication of the works of E.V. Ramasami (Popularly called as Periyar) by the respondents will amount to infringement of copyright of the plaintiff- - 65 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS Association represented by its Secretary Mr. K. Veeramani and whether they are entitled to get a temporary injunction against the respondents are the issues involved in this Application. 37. In the present case, a reading of memorandum of association and the Rules and Regulations does not disclose any such vesting of ownership with the society. In fact, Rules 22 and 23 only talk about future purchases of properties vesting with the society. The copyright in literary materials can only be an intellectual property and there has to be material to show that it was specially assigned. It is an admitted case that Periyar (E.Ve.Ra.) died intestate and there is no written or other materials to show that a copyright has been reserved by him as an author of those articles and that he also assigned it in favour of the plaintiff. 41. If it is seen in the above factual matrix and legal precedents, then it can be safely held that the plaintiff had failed to establish any ownership of the copyright in their favour and a corresponding infringement of copyright on the part of the respondents. Neither there is a prima facie case nor balance of convenience is in favour of grant of any interim order or to continue the order of injunction. The applicant/plaintiff has not made out any case. The issue raised here is squarely covered by the exemption provided under Section 52(1)(m) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed. No costs.” 15. It is well settled that if a plaint does not disclose any cause of action and / or is barred by any law, such a plaint is liable - 66 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS to be rejected as held in various judgments of the Apex Court and this Court including the judgment of the Apex Court in Dahiben’s case supra, wherein it is held as under:- “ 23.1. We will first briefly touch upon the law applicable for deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, which reads as under: “11. Rejection of plaint.—The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases— (a) where it does not disclose a cause of action; (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so; (c) where the relief claimed is properly valued but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the court to supply the requisite stamp paper within a time to be fixed by the court, fails to do so; (d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; (e) where it is not filed in duplicate; (f) where the plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of Rule 9: Provided that the time fixed by the court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp-papers shall not be extended unless the court, for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature from correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp- papers, as the case may be, within the time fixed by the court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff.” 23.2. The remedy under Order 7 Rule 11 is an independent and special remedy, wherein the court is - 67 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS empowered to summarily dismiss a suit at the threshold, without proceeding to record evidence, and conducting a trial, on the basis of the evidence adduced, if it is satisfied that the action should be terminated on any of the grounds contained in this provision. 23.3. The underlying object of Order 7 Rule 11(a) is that if in a suit, no cause of action is disclosed, or the suit is barred by limitation under Rule 11(d), the court would not permit the plaintiff to unnecessarily protract the proceedings in the suit. In such a case, it would be necessary to put an end to the sham litigation, so that further judicial time is not wasted. 23.4. In Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi [Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi, 1986 Supp SCC 315. Followed in Manvendrasinhji Ranjitsinhji Jadeja v. Vijaykunverba, 1998 SCC OnLine Guj 281 : (1998) 2 GLH 823] this Court held that the whole purpose of conferment of powers under this provision is to ensure that a litigation which is meaningless, and bound to prove abortive, should not be permitted to waste judicial time of the court, in the following words : (SCC p. 324, para 12) “12. … The whole purpose of conferment of such powers is to ensure that a litigation which is meaningless, and bound to prove abortive should not be permitted to occupy the time of the court, and exercise the mind of the respondent. The sword of Damocles need not be kept hanging over his head unnecessarily without point or purpose. Even in an ordinary civil litigation, the court readily exercises the power to reject a plaint, if it does not disclose any cause of action.” - 68 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 23.5. The power conferred on the court to terminate a civil action is, however, a drastic one, and the conditions enumerated in Order 7 Rule 11 are required to be strictly adhered to. 23.6. Under Order 7 Rule 11, a duty is cast on the court to determine whether the plaint discloses a cause of action by scrutinising the averments in the plaint [Liverpool & London S.P. & I Assn. Ltd. v. M.V. Sea Success I, (2004) 9 SCC 512] , read in conjunction with the documents relied upon, or whether the suit is barred by any law. 23.7. Order 7 Rule 14(1) provides for production of documents, on which the plaintiff places reliance in his suit, which reads as under: “14. Production of document on which plaintiff sues or relies.—(1) Where a plaintiff sues upon a document or relies upon document in his possession or power in support of his claim, he shall enter such documents in a list, and shall produce it in court when the plaint is presented by him and shall, at the same time deliver the document and a copy thereof, to be filed with the plaint. (2) Where any such document is not in the possession or power of the plaintiff, he shall, wherever possible, state in whose possession or power it is. (3) A document which ought to be produced in court by the plaintiff when the plaint is presented, or to be entered in the list to be added or annexed to the plaint but is not produced or entered accordingly, shall not, without the leave of the court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the suit. (4) Nothing in this Rule shall apply to document produced for the cross-examination of the plaintiff's witnesses, or, handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.” - 69 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 23.8. Having regard to Order 7 Rule 14 CPC, the documents filed along with the plaint, are required to be taken into consideration for deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11(a). When a document referred to in the plaint, forms the basis of the plaint, it should be treated as a part of the plaint. 23.9. In exercise of power under this provision, the court would determine if the assertions made in the plaint are contrary to statutory law, or judicial dicta, for deciding whether a case for rejecting the plaint at the threshold is made out. 23.10. At this stage, the pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement and application for rejection of the plaint on the merits, would be irrelevant, and cannot be adverted to, or taken into consideration. [Sopan Sukhdeo Sable v. Charity Commr., (2004) 3 SCC 137] 23.11. The test for exercising the power under Order 7 Rule 11 is that if the averments made in the plaint are taken in entirety, in conjunction with the documents relied upon, would the same result in a decree being passed. This test was laid down in Liverpool & London S.P. & I Assn. Ltd. v. M.V. Sea Success I [Liverpool & London S.P. & I Assn. Ltd. v. M.V. Sea Success I, (2004) 9 SCC 512] which reads as : (SCC p. 562, para 139) “139. Whether a plaint discloses a cause of action or not is essentially a question of fact. But whether it does or does not must be found out from reading the plaint itself. For the said purpose, the averments made in the plaint in their entirety must be held to be correct. The test is as to whether if the - 70 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS averments made in the plaint are taken to be correct in their entirety, a decree would be passed.” 23.12. In Hardesh Ores (P) Ltd. v. Hede & Co. [Hardesh Ores (P) Ltd. v. Hede & Co., (2007) 5 SCC 614] the Court further held that it is not permissible to cull out a sentence or a passage, and to read it in isolation. It is the substance, and not merely the form, which has to be looked into. The plaint has to be construed as it stands, without addition or subtraction of words. If the allegations in the plaint prima facie show a cause of action, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry whether the allegations are true in fact. D. Ramachandran v. R.V. Janakiraman [D. Ramachandran v. R.V. Janakiraman, (1999) 3 SCC 267; See also Vijay Pratap Singh v. Dukh Haran Nath Singh, AIR 1962 SC 941] . 23.13. If on a meaningful reading of the plaint, it is found that the suit is manifestly vexatious and without any merit, and does not disclose a right to sue, the court would be justified in exercising the power under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. 23.14. The power under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC may be exercised by the court at any stage of the suit, either before registering the plaint, or after issuing summons to the defendant, or before conclusion of the trial, as held by this Court in the judgment of Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra [Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra, (2003) 1 SCC 557] . The plea that once issues are framed, the matter must necessarily go to trial was repelled by this Court in Azhar Hussain case [Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandhi, 1986 Supp SCC 315. Followed in Manvendrasinhji Ranjitsinhji Jadeja v. - 71 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS Vijaykunverba, 1998 SCC OnLine Guj 281 : (1998) 2 GLH 823] . 23.15. The provision of Order 7 Rule 11 is mandatory in nature. It states that the plaint “shall” be rejected if any of the grounds specified in clauses (a) to (e) are made out. If the court finds that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action, or that the suit is barred by any law, the court has no option, but to reject the plaint. 24. “Cause of action” means every fact which would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support his right to judgment. It consists of a bundle of material facts, which are necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to entitle him to the reliefs claimed in the suit. 24.1. In Swamy Atmananda v. Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam [Swamy Atmananda v. Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam, (2005) 10 SCC 51] this Court held : (SCC p. 60, para 24) “24. A cause of action, thus, means every fact, which, if traversed, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to a judgment of the court. In other words, it is a bundle of facts, which taken with the law applicable to them gives the plaintiff a right to relief against the defendant. It must include some act done by the defendant since in the absence of such an act, no cause of action can possibly accrue. It is not limited to the actual infringement of the right sued on but includes all the material facts on which it is founded.” 24.2. In T. Arivandandam v. T.V. Satyapal [T. Arivandandam v. T.V. Satyapal, (1977) 4 SCC 467] this Court held that while considering an application under Order 7 Rule - 72 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 11 CPC what is required to be decided is whether the plaint discloses a real cause of action, or something purely illusory, in the following words : (SCC p. 470, para 5) “5. … The learned Munsif must remember that if on a meaningful—not formal—reading of the plaint it is manifestly vexatious, and meritless, in the sense of not disclosing a clear right to sue, he should exercise his power under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC taking care to see that the ground mentioned therein is fulfilled. And, if clever drafting has created the illusion of a cause of action, nip it in the bud at the first hearing.…” 24.3. Subsequently, in ITC Ltd. v. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal [ITC Ltd. v. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, (1998) 2 SCC 70] this Court held that law cannot permit clever drafting which creates illusions of a cause of action. What is required is that a clear right must be made out in the plaint. 24.4. If, however, by clever drafting of the plaint, it has created the illusion of a cause of action, this Court in Madanuri Sri Rama Chandra Murthy v. Syed Jalal [Madanuri Sri Rama Chandra Murthy v. Syed Jalal, (2017) 13 SCC 174 : (2017) 5 SCC (Civ) 602] held that it should be nipped in the bud, so that bogus litigation will end at the earliest stage. The Court must be vigilant against any camouflage or suppression, and determine whether the litigation is utterly vexatious, and an abuse of the process of the court.” 16. In the instant case, as stated earlier, the plaintiff does not claim to be the owner of the plaint schedule copyrights nor a licencee / exclusive licencee of the same and merely because the - 73 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS owners of the copyrights are members of the plaintiff – Association, it cannot be said that there arises any cause of action in favour of the plaintiff to institute the instant suit for alleged infringement of the alleged copyrights of the Producers / members who are alleged to be the owners of the copyrights in question and consequently, the plaint averments clearly does not disclose existence of any cause of action in favour of the plaintiff – Association which is an independent, legal and juristic entity to institute and maintain the suit on behalf of the members / producers. 17. Section 61 of the said Act of 1957 reads as under:- “ 61. Owner of copyright to be party to the proceeding.— (1) In every civil suit or other proceeding regarding infringement of copyright instituted by an exclusive licensee, the owner of the copyright shall, unless the court otherwise directs, be made a defendant and where such owner is made a defendant, he shall have the right to dispute the claim of the exclusive licensee. (2) Where any civil suit or other proceeding regarding infringement of copyright instituted by an exclusive licensee is successful, no fresh suit or other proceeding in respect of the same cause of action shall lie at the instance of the owner of the copyright.” - 74 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 18. Section 61 supra, indicates that in a suit regarding infringement of copyright by an exclusive licencee , the owner of the copyright is both a proper and necessary party to the suit and any such suit without impleading the owners of the copyright was not maintainable; in the instant case, apart from the fact that the plaintiff-Association does not claim to be the licencee / exclusive licencee of the plaint schedule copyrights of which the Producers / Members were the owners, the said persons / entities had not been impleaded / arrayed as parties to the suit which was clearly bad for non-joinder of proper and necessary parties and consequently, the suit was not maintainable and the plaint was liable to be rejected on this ground also. 19. 19. The plaintiff has contended that it was an Association which had instituted the suit on behalf of its members / Producers to protect their interest in the plaint schedule copyrights and the suit was maintainable in law; the said contention cannot be accepted for more than one reason; there was no resolution or authorization by the Executive committee of the plaintiff – Association which permitted, empowered or authorised the President – Sri.D.K.Ramakrishna to present and prosecute the suit on behalf of - 75 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS the plaintiff – Association; even according to the Byelaws, any action taken by the President on behalf of its members is to be ratified by the Executive committee and no such ratification for instituting the present suit is placed by the plaintiff in this regard and no other material is also available to establish that the President was entitled to present and prosecute the suit on behalf of the plaintiff-Association; further, the Byelaws which provide for constitution of an Executive committee also stipulates that it is only the Executive committee that can initiate legal action on behalf of the Association and not the President. 20. In the cases on hand, it is an undisputed fact that the plaint is filed by the President – D.K.Ramakrishna without any authorization or ratification by the Executive committee nor is there any resolution in his favour and consequently, it cannot be said that the present suit filed by D.K.Ramakrishna was maintainable in law, especially when the plaintiff – Association was not the owner of the plaint schedule copyrights and the suit was liable to be dismissed on this score also. 21. As stated supra, the plaintiff – Association is an independent legal and juristic entity which is not the owner of the - 76 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS plaint schedule copyrights, thereby establishing that the plaintiff – Association does not have any personal interest in the subject matter of the suit. In this context, it is apposite to refer to Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which reads as under:- 41(j) Relief of injunction- Held, The reliefs under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 are granted for the purpose of enforcing individual civil rights as will be clear from Section 4 of the Specific Relief Act. 1963. Accordingly, injunction under Part III of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is granted to the plaintiff either to prevent a breach of an obligation in favour of the plaintiff, or to compel the performance of an obligation in favour of the plaintiff which needs to be enforced, the Court cannot grant injunction. Hence, it is provided in Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act 1963 that an injunction cannot be granted when the plaintiff has no personal interest in the matter. The Provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 do not apply to the right conferred on the Corporation and any other person under sub-section (5) of Section 307 of M.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1956. Under the Provisions of the Act of 1956 and every building must comply with the provisions of the Act of 1956 and the byelaws made thereunder and hence if there is any breach of the provisions of the Act of the 1956 or the bye-laws made thereunder, sub-section (5) of Section 307 of the Act of 1956 confers a right not only on the Corporation but also any other person to apply to the District Court for an injunction for removal or alteration of a building on the - 77 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS ground that there has been the contravention of the provisions of the Act of 1956 or the bye-laws made thereunder. This remedy under sub-section (5) of Section 307 of the Act of 1956 is independent of and different from the remedies under the Specific Relief Act 1963.” 22. As can be seen from the aforesaid provision, a suit for permanent injunction by a plaintiff who does not have any personal interest in the subject matter of the suit was not maintainable and an injunction cannot be granted in favour of such a plaintiff; in the instant case, having regard to the undisputed fact that the plaintiff not being an owner or a licencee or an exclusive licencee of the plaint schedule copyrights clearly does not have any personal interest in the plaint schedule copyrights which were the subject matter of the suit and as such, the instant suit for permanent injunction simpliciter filed by the plaintiff which was an independent, legal and juristic entity, which was mutually exclusive and different from the Producers / members who were the owners of the plaint schedule copyrights was clearly not maintainable and the plaint was liable to be rejected on this ground also. 23. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that despite having referred to the provisions contained in Sections 54, 55 and - 78 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS 61 of the said Act of 1957 as well as the provisions contained in Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act, the trial court has not considered the various aspects of the matter or the contentions urged by the petitioners, thereby resulting in an erroneous conclusion. The trial court also came to the erroneous conclusion that the issue of locus standi, maintainability of the suit and non- joinder of parties would have to be decided only after trial without appreciating that even as per the plaint averments and documents produced along with it, the suit was not maintainable and there was no cause of action for the suit which was liable to be dismissed for the reasons stated hereinbefore. 24. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the trial court completely misdirected itself in coming to the erroneous conclusion that the plaint cannot be rejected by improper and erroneous appreciation of the material on record and relevant statutory provisions warranting interference by this Court in the present petitions which deserve to be allowed by setting aside the impugned order and thereby rejecting the plaint filed by the plaintiff. 25. Insofar as the judgments relied upon by the learned Senior counsel for the 1st respondent – plaintiff is concerned, the - 79 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15321 CRP No. 378 of 2021 C/W CRP No. 377 of 2021 CRP No. 120 of 2022 AND 3 OTHERS said judgments are not applicable to the facts and circumstances obtaining in the instant case and none of the judgments have been rendered with reference to either Sections 54, 55 or 61 of the said Act of 1957 nor Section 41(j) of the Specific Relief Act as referred to supra and as such, the said judgments cannot be relied upon by the plaintiff in support of its contentions. 26. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) All the Civil Revision Petitions are hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 21.10.2021 passed in O.S.No.25863/2020 by the trial court is hereby set aside. (iii) The applications filed by the defendants 1, 2, 3, 10, 15, 16, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28 and 29 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC are hereby allowed. (iv) Consequently, the plaint filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.25863/2020 is hereby rejected. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Srl.