STAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITEDversusDEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION & ORS.
2018 INSC 102230 October 2018Dismissed
Star India Private Limited challenged the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable) Services Interconnection (Addressable Systems) Regulations, 2017 and the accompanying Tariff Order, alleging that TRAI had overstepped its jurisdiction by regulating the content, pricing and packaging of TV channels, which they argued …
M/S. PARAGON RUBBER INDUSTRIESversusM/S. PRAGATHI RUBBER MILLS & ORS.
2013 INSC 79829 November 2013Dismissed
The plaintiff, Paragon Rubber Industries, filed a suit in the District Court of Kottayam seeking relief under the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. The defendants challenged the suit's territorial jurisdiction, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction under the 1958 Act. The trial cou…
SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITEDversusNEXT RADIO LIMITED & ORS.
2021 INSC 55427 September 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The Madras High Court, in an interim order, altered Rule 29(4) of the Copyright Rules, 2013 by allowing broadcasters to furnish notice details within fifteen days after a broadcast and treating the 24‑hour exception as a routine procedure. Saregama India Ltd and other appellants challenged this order, arguing that the …
FERANI HOTELS PVT. LTD.versusTHE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.
2018 INSC 90427 September 2018Dismissed
Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) entered into a development agreement with Mr. Nusli Neville Wadia (respondent No.3), who later terminated the agreement and sought certified copies of the development plans, layouts and related documents filed with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under the Right to Inform…
BRIGADIER MAN MOHAN SHARMA, FRGS (RETD.)versusLT. GEN. DEPINDER SINGH
2008 INSC 135326 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed
Lt. Gen. Depinder Singh (author) entered a publication agreement with Dattatreya Prakashan, later acquired by the appellant (Trishul Publications). After publishing the first and second editions, the appellant refused further editions and suggested the author authorize another publisher, Natraj Publishers, to reprint 1…
SWAPNIL TRIPATHIversusSUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2018 INSC 88626 September 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The petitioners filed a writ under Article 32 seeking a declaration that Supreme Court proceedings of constitutional and national importance be live‑streamed and that a regulatory framework be established. The Court examined whether live‑streaming is compatible with the constitutional mandate of open courts, the rights…
M/S. NANDHINI DELUXEversusM/S. KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD.
2018 INSC 64226 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation (respondent) had been using the mark ‘NANDINI’ for milk and milk products since 1985, while the restaurant chain M/s. Nandhini Deluxe (appellant) began using the mark ‘NANDHINI’ for its restaurants in 1989 and later applied for registration of the mark for various foo…
M/S. ZEE TELEFILMS LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LTD.)versusSURESH PRODUCTIONS & ORS.
2020 INSC 22325 February 2020Dismissed
The plaintiffs, Zee Telefilms, had assigned satellite broadcasting rights of sixteen Hindi films to certain defendants for nine years on 23‑December‑1994. In 2003 they issued a public notice about the films, after which the first defendant claimed to have acquired the same rights via a 1997 assignment. Zee filed a suit…
ACADEMY OF GENERAL EDU., MANIPAL & ANR.versusB. MALINI MALLYA
2009 INSC 5623 January 2009Dismissed
Dr. Karanth, a noted cultural figure, created a new form of Yakshagana ballet called Yaksharanga, comprising seven Prasangas, and bequeathed the copyright in these works to Malini Mallya by a will. The Academy of General Education performed the ballets without obtaining permission, leading the trial court to grant a pe…
UNION OF INDIAversusBOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.
2017 INSC 78622 August 2017Dismissed
The Union of India challenged the re‑telecast of live cricket feeds, shared by Star India and ESPN with Prasar Bharati under Section 3 of the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007, by cable operators under Section 8 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. The pet…
GRAMOPHONE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD.versusBIRENDRA BAHADUR PANDEY & ORS.
1984 INSC 4021 February 1984Appeal(s) allowed
The Gramophone Company of India sought to prevent the import of cassette recordings it alleged were pirated and destined for transit to Nepal. It applied to the Registrar of Copyrights under s.53 of the Copyright Act, 1957, to have the cassettes declared prohibited imports. The Calcutta High Court allowed the Registrar…
INTERNATIONAL CONFEDERATION OF SOCIETIES OF AUTHORS AND COMPOSERS (CISAC)versusADITYA PANDEY & ORS.
2016 INSC 89220 September 2016Disposed off
The case concerned suits alleging infringement of copyrights in lyrics and musical works where the plaintiffs (copyright societies) sought interim injunctions against the defendants for public performance of sound recordings without proper licences. The Delhi High Court had disposed of the interim applications in favou…
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESHversusNAGOTIVENKATARAMANA
1996 INSC 90920 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Andhra Pradesh prosecuted N. Venkatramana, a video shop owner, for possessing 90 video cassettes that lacked the statutory particulars required under Section 52-A of the Copyright Act, 1957. The trial court convicted him under Section 63, imposing six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000, a sentence…
M/S KNIT PRO INTERNATIONALversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
2022 INSC 62120 May 2022Appeal(s) allowed
M/S Knit Pro International filed a criminal application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to register an FIR against respondent No.2 for alleged violations of Sections 51, 63 and 64 of the Copyright Act and Section 420 of the IPC. The FIR was registered, but the respondent obtained a writ order from the Delhi High Court…
M/S BENGAL WATERPROOF LIMITEDversusMIS BOMBAY WATERPROOF MANUFACTURING CO. AND ANR.
1996 INSC 132118 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed
Bengal Waterproof Ltd., holder of the registered trademark ‘Duck Back’, sued Bombay Waterproof Manufacturing Co. for infringement and passing off. The first suit (1980) was dismissed, and a second suit (1982) was filed alleging continuous infringement after the first suit. The trial court and High Court held the second…
THE SOUTH INDIAN FILM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, MADRAS ETC.versusENTERTAINING ENTERPRISES, MADRAS AND ORS. ETC.
1994 INSC 61916 December 1994Appeal(s) allowed
The South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 9(2) and 10(2) of the Tamil Nadu Exhibition of Films on Television Screen through Video Cassette Recorders (Regulation) Act, 1984, arguing that the State legislature lacked competence because the provisions dealt with copyright…
M/S ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK (INDIA) LTD.versusM/S SUPER CASSETTE INDUSTRIES LTD.
2008 INSC 70816 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined a dispute between Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. (Radio Mirchi) and Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. over the broadcast of copyrighted sound recordings. The appellant sought a compulsory licence under Section 31(1)(b) of the Copyright Act, 1957, after the Copyright Board had fixed royalty …
DABUR INDIA LTD.versusK.R. INDUSTRIES
2008 INSC 72516 May 2008Dismissed
Dabur India Ltd., the maker of "Dabur Red Tooth Powder", sued K.R. Industries for copyright infringement of its packaging and for passing off. The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit on the ground that it lacked territorial jurisdiction over the passing‑off claim, relying on the Dhodha House decision. Dabur appealed, a…
M/S. DHODHA HOUSEversusS.K. MAINGI
2005 INSC 61715 December 2005
The Supreme Court considered two appeals arising from suits alleging infringement of copyright and trade‑mark rights – one by Dhodha House (sweet‑meats) filed in the Ghaziabad district court and another by Patel Field Marshal (diesel engines) filed in the Delhi High Court. Both lower courts had held they lacked territo…
KRISHIKA LULLA & ORS.versusSHYAM VITHALRAO DEVKATIA & ANR.
2015 INSC 78115 October 2015Appeal(s) allowed
Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta filed a criminal complaint under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 alleging that the film "Desi Boyz" infringed the copyright in the title of his story synopsis "Desi Boys". The accused filed applications under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the complaint; the Bombay High Court dismissed …
CRYOGAS EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITEDversusINOX INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 48315 April 2025Dismissed
The dispute arose when Inox India Ltd filed a trademark suit alleging that Cryogas Equipment Pvt Ltd and LNG Express infringed its proprietary engineering drawings and related literary works used in cryogenic semi‑trailers. LNG Express moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, arguing that the drawings w…
SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTIversusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
2016 INSC 113114 December 2016Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Sharad Babu Digumarti, was charged under IPC Sections 292 and 294 and IT Act Section 67 for alleged possession of obscene material in electronic form. He was discharged of the IT Act charge but the trial court framed a charge under IPC Section 292, which the High Court upheld. The Supreme Court examined …
ASIAN PAINTS LIMITEDversusRAM BABU & ANOTHER
2025 INSC 82814 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed
Asian Paints Ltd., a paint manufacturer, discovered that counterfeit paints bearing its brand were being sold by Ram Babu. The company, through a power of attorney, engaged an IPR consultancy to investigate and the investigation led to an FIR under the IPC and Copyright Act. The trial court convicted Ram Babu, but the …
VICCO LABORATORIES AND ANR.versusART COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
2001 INSC 35913 August 2001Dismissed
Vicco Laboratories, a manufacturer of ayurvedic products, hired Art Commercial Advertising and its partners to produce a television serial titled "Yeh Jo Hai Zindagi" for Doordarshan, paying them a fixed sum as sponsorship. Vicco claimed it was the producer and owner of the copyright and the exclusive right to use the …
EASTERN BOOK COMPANY & ORS.versusD.B. MODAK & ANR.
2007 INSC 126612 December 2007Case Partly allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether the copy‑edited versions of Supreme Court judgments published in the law report "Supreme Court Cases" (SCC) qualify as original literary works eligible for copyright. It held that the judgments themselves are government works in the public domain and their reproduction does not infrin…
MAHENDRA AND MAHENDRA PAPER MILLS LTD.versusMAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA LTD.
2001 INSC 5689 November 2001Dismissed
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., a long‑standing user of the registered trademark "Mahindra", sued Mahendra & Mahindra Paper Mills Ltd. for passing‑off and trademark infringement, seeking permanent and interim injunctions to stop the defendant from using the name "Mahendra & Mahendra". The Bombay High Court granted an interim…
TARUN TYAGIversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
2017 INSC 12618 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed
Tarun Tyagi was charged with stealing the source code of the 'Quick Recovery' software and selling it through his own company. The CBI seized three hard disks (Q‑2, Q‑9, Q‑20) containing the alleged source code. Tyagi sought copies of these disks under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to prepare his defenc…
POWER CONTROL APPLIANCES AND ORS.versusSUMEET MACHINES PVT. LTD.
1994 INSC 548 February 1994Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs, Power Control Appliances and related companies, owned the copyright in the packaging, instruction manual, guarantee card and the design of the 'whipper blade' of their 'Sumeet' kitchen mixers, and the registered trade mark 'Sumeet'. The defendant, Sumeet Machines Pvt. Ltd., began manufacturing and marke…
SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES LTD.versusMUSIC BROADCAST PVT. LTD.
2012 INSC 2004 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether the Copyright Board, under Section 31(1)(b) of the Copyright Act, 1957, could grant an interim compulsory licence while a complaint was pending. The Board had earlier held it lacked such power, but the Delhi High Court reversed that view and directed the Board to grant an interim lice…
T.V. VENUGOPALversusUSHODAYA ENTERPRISES LTD. AND ANR.
2011 INSC 1763 March 2011Disposed off
The appellant, a Karnataka‑based incense‑stick manufacturer, adopted the mark "Eenadu" for its products and sold them in Andhra Pradesh. The respondent, a prominent Telugu newspaper and media group, claimed that the mark had acquired extraordinary reputation and goodwill in the state and that the appellant’s use amount…
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAversusSHAUNAK H.SATYA & ORS.
2011 INSC 6402 September 2011Case Partly allowed
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) conducted examinations for chartered accountants and was asked by Shaunak H. Satya, a failed candidate, to disclose the instructions, model answers and related materials given to examiners and moderators under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI). The issues we…
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.
2021 INSC 1372 March 2021Disposed off
The Supreme Court considered appeals concerning whether payments made by Indian residents to non-resident foreign software suppliers for computer software, under End User Licence Agreements (EULAs) and distribution agreements, constitute 'royalty' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements …
INDIAN PERFORMING RIGHTS SOCIETY LTD.versusSANJAY DALIA&ANR.
2015 INSC 4521 July 2015Dismissed
The Supreme Court examined whether sections 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 allow a plaintiff to sue in a district court where it resides or carries on business even when the cause of action has also arisen at its principal place of business. The Court held that these provisions creat…