Skip to main content

HC seeks Dharma's response in Indian Singers Rights Association's plea seeking Royalty for performance in Gunjan Saxena

 The High Court of Delhi has asked Dharma Productions to file a response to the Indian Singers Rights Association's plea seeking royalty for the commercial exploitation of their performance in "Gunjan Saxena- The Kargil Girl."


A single-Judge bench of Justice Mukta Gupta issued summons to Karan Johar-owned production house Dharma Productions on the plea filed by Indian Singers Rights Association's suit.


The Court listed the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2021.


However, the Court deferred passing any order/directions to the defendant to deposit the amount till the next date of hearing.


The Court said that "Considering the fact that the rival contentions & the underlying agreements are yet to be considered by this Court, this Court, at this stage, is deferring passing any order/directions to the defendant to deposit the amount till the next date of hearing before which date parties will complete their pleadings".

The Court was hearing the Indian Singers Rights Association's suit filed by the plaintiff seeking enforcement of its performers' rights which were introduced in the Copyright

(Amendment) Act, 2012 by amending Section 38 & introducing Section 38A & 38B to the Copyright Act.


The plaintiff claimed that the defendant released the cinematograph film 'Gunjan Saxena- The Kargil Girl' commercially utilising three performances of the members of the plaintiff society which were originally part of earlier cinematograph films.


The plaintiff on becoming aware of the infringement of its rights issued a legal notice to the defendant claiming that the plaintiff's members had the copyright in respect of the performers' rights in 'Ae Ji O Ji' from the cinematograph film "Ram Lakhan", 'Choli Ke Peeche Kya Hai' from the cinematograph film "Khalnayak" & 'Saajan ji Gher Aaye' from the film "Kuch Kuch Hota Hai".

According to the counsel for the plaintiff, since as per the scheme arrived at, the tariff for the performers' rights is fixed, the defendant is bound to deposit the amount before this Court pending final decision.


Plaintiff claims its rights on the basis of Section 2(q) & Section 2(qq) of the Copyright Act, which defines the 'performance' & 'performer' as also sections 38A & 38B of the Copyright Act.


Lawyer for the defendant, Dharma Productions claimed that the studio performances which do not go live, are not considered to be live performances & in the present case, since the performance is in studios that do not go live, the plaintiff's members cannot claim performers' rights.

.

LEXIS AND COMPANY
"ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS"
We are India’s Leading Law Firm
“The firm has always strives to create and implement innovative and effective methods of providing cost-effective, quality representation and services for our clients and will continue to meet and exceed the expectations of our valued clients.”

–    DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA (ADVOCATE, FOUNDER-LEXIS AND COMPANY).

Get in Touch

LEXIS AND COMPANY.
C/O: DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA.
OFFICE: A1B/26, JANAKPURI, GROUND FLOOR,
NEW DELHI,, DELHI, 110058.
INDIA.
lexisandcompany@gmail.com
CALL: +91-9830333388.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct