Junior Dagar Brothers<\/a> as original composers of “Shiva Stuti” and granted notable interim relief in the form of Credits, 2 Lakh Rupees Costs, and 2 Crore Rupees Deposit.<\/p>\r\nBackground<\/h5>\r\n
The Plaintiff, Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, a distinguished Dhrupad vocalist and successor to the Junior Dagar Brothers\u2019 musical legacy, contended that the song “Veera Raja Veera,” incorporated in the film Ponniyin Selvan 2 (“PS-2”), had substantially appropriated the melodic arrangement, structure, and rhythmic cycle of “Shiva Stuti” without authorization or attribution. The music director of PS-2 was the renowned composer, A.R. Rahman.<\/p>\r\n
Dagar\u2019s Submissions<\/h5>\r\n
Dagar submitted through notation charts, performance recordings, and historical documents that “Veera Raja Veera” closely replicated essential elements of “Shiva Stuti,” including the selection and arrangement of Swaras and the ten-beat Sultaal cycle. He asserted that the unique melodic pattern created by the Junior Dagar Brothers was original and entitled to copyright protection, and that unauthorized use infringed both copyright and moral rights of the original composers.<\/p>\r\n
Submissions of AR Rahman and other Defendants<\/h5>\r\n
The Defendants argued that “Veera Raja Veera” was an original creation inspired only broadly by Dagarvani tradition and constructed primarily using Western musical fundamentals. They contended that similarities were inevitable due to the rigid grammar of Hindustani classical music and emphasized that Ragas, Taals, and musical styles, being traditional and in the public domain, could not be monopolized under the copyright law. As a result, there can be no copyright infringement in copying or adapting those.<\/p>\r\n
The Court\u2019s Decision<\/h5>\r\n
Upon examining the pleadings, musical notations, performances, and the historical record\u2014including the Junior Dagar Brothers’ 1978 Amsterdam performance\u2014the Court held that “Shiva Stuti” was an original musical work entitled to copyright protection. It found that the Plaintiff had acquired rights through a family settlement after the demise of the original composers.<\/p>\r\n
On the issue of infringement, the Court carefully distinguished between unprotectable traditional elements and the protectable unique expression of the Junior Dagar Brothers. It held that substantial parts of “Veera Raja Veera” unmistakably resembled the original composition\u2019s melodic and rhythmic structure. Applying the test of substantial similarity from the point of view of an ordinary listener, it concluded that copyright infringement was prima facie established.<\/p>\r\n
Credits, Costs, and Deposit<\/h5>\r\n
While the Court declined to restrain the continued use of “Veera Raja Veera” due to its widespread release, it directed that appropriate credits must be given to the Junior Dagar Brothers wherever the impugned song appeared, acknowledging them as the original authors of the underlying musical works.<\/p>\r\n
Further, the Court ordered the Defendants to deposit \u20b92 crores with the Court as security to safeguard the Plaintiff\u2019s potential claim for damages. In addition, the Court also awarded costs of \u20b92 lakh to the Plaintiff, payable by the Defendants.<\/p>\r\n
Citation: Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar v. A.R. Rahman & Ors., CS(COMM) 773\/2023 (H.C. Delhi April 25, 2025). Available at: http:\/\/indiankanoon.org\/doc\/114335576\/<\/a>, Visited on: 26\/04\/2025.<\/em><\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In a major copyright case over Ponniyin Selvan 2’s song “Veera Raja Veera,” the Delhi High Court ruled partially in favour of Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar against A.R. Rahman and others, ordering credits to the Junior Dagar Brothers, a \u20b92 crore deposit, and \u20b92 lakh costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":128854,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":285,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,5495,3,7],"tags":[6684,93,6677,486,6676],"class_list":["post-128613","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-intellectual-property","category-case-reviews","category-copyrights","category-media-and-entertainment-law","tag-a-r-rahman","tag-copyright-law","tag-dagar-brothers","tag-delhi-high-court","tag-ps2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128613","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128613"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128613\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":128872,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128613\/revisions\/128872"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/128854"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128613"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128613"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128613"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}