The plaintiff, Saregama India Limited, claimed copyright in the song Naguva Nayana and its underlying literary and musical works from the film Pallavi Anu Pallavi. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants used this song in their film Mask without authorisation. The producer of Pallavi Anu Pallavi, M\/s Venus Pictures, had assigned the rights to the plaintiff under a Copyright Assignment Agreement dated 27 December 1980. The defendants asserted that they had taken a licence from the composer of the song, Mr Ilaiyaraja.<\/p>\n
The court observed that, under Section 17 of the Copyright Act, the author of a work is the first owner of copyright. However, as per Section 17(b), when a musical or literary work is created for a cinematographic film for valuable consideration, the producer becomes the first owner unless there is an agreement to the contrary.<\/p>\n
The court said the producer of Pallavi Anu Pallavi was the first owner of the copyright in the song, having commissioned the composer. By virtue of the Copyright Assignment Agreement, the rights were vested with the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
The court noted that the composer, Defendant No. 5, did not retain any rights and was not authorised to issue a licence for the use of the song. The composer was not the author of the lyrics, and therefore had no right to license the literary work either.<\/p>\n
Referring to the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. vs Eastern Indian Motion Pictures Association, the court reaffirmed that the producer owns the copyright in music created for films when commissioned for valuable consideration.<\/p>\n
The court held that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case. However, as the film had already been released theatrically and the plaintiff did not oppose its release on OTT and satellite platforms if licence fees were paid, the court found that balance of convenience did not favour a full injunction.<\/p>\n
The court directed the defendants to either:<\/p>\n
If the defendants failed to comply, they would be restrained from releasing the film with the infringing song on any such platform.<\/p>\n
Paragraph 25: \u201cSection 17(b) of the Act provides that when a cinematographic film is created for valuable consideration… the producer becomes the first owner of the Copyright…\u201d<\/p>\n
Paragraph 26: \u201cIt is prima facie evident that the Plaintiff holds the Copyright in the Subject Song.\u201d<\/p>\n
Paragraph 28: \u201c… Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 shall either remove the Subject Song… or deposit an amount of \u20b930,00,000 with the Registrar General…\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Case Citation<\/h5>\n
Saregama India Limited vs Black Madras Films & Ors, CS(COMM) 1310\/2025, decided on 9 December 2025.<\/p>\n