V. Ramaiah vs K. Lakshmaiah

K. Ramaswamy, J.—The unsuccessful plaintiff at the trial had second innings in this appeal. The gravamen of his charge is that the respondent/defendant pirated his ''Girija Kalyanam''. Text book for profit and thereby infringed his copyright provided u/s 52 of the Copyright Act, 14 of 1957 (for short "the Act"). Therefore, he laid the suit for perpetual injunction and for damages. The trial Court dismissed the suit. Thus, the appeal.

The substantial averments made in support of the relief are: One Mocherlala Ramakrishnaiah wrote "Girija Kalyanam" which was approved by the Osmania University as one of the five subjects for B.A., B. Corn., and B. Sc. Students for Paper 1 and II. The respondent wrote a guide under the name "Sri Vidya Excellent Guide" to help the students in original language, Telugu Part I and II under Exs. A-19 to A-23, According to the plaintiff, the book was assigned to him by Mocherlala Ramakrishnaiah under a deed of assignment (Ex. A-1) dated June 15, 1937 and the respondent defendant pirated his (plaintiff''s) right as a copyright holder. The respondent pleaded that writing of the guide does not amount to infringement of the copyright of the appellant and he used the words fairly for the purpose of guiding the students to help them to write the examination and a fair reading of the guide prepared by him shows that his Act does not amount to any infringement of copyright and it is inconsistent with the Provisions of Section 52 of the Act. The respondent also denied that the appellant is making any independent contribution and used it as his work and marketed it for the purpose of the general public. Certainly, his conduct would constitute an infringement of the right of the original author. But respondent acknowledged Ramakrishnaiah to be author of "Girija Kalyanam" and then wrote the guide to help the students. This book is one of live subjects prescribed for the students.

Considered from this perspective, I do not find any justification to hold that the respondent-defendant pirated the language used or the subject used ad nauseam so as to come within the meaning "infringement".

Grant of injunction is a matter of discretion. On the facts and circumstances, the trial Court did not feel it necessary to issue an injunction as prayed for by the appellant plaintiff: I have given my anxious consideration to this question. I do not find that the lower Court committed any illegality in not grating the injunction Accordingly, the decree of the trial Court is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances, each party is directed to bear its won costs. The Government is directed to collect the Court- fee payable from the appellant.