Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Temporary Injunction In Copyright Dispute As Suit Was Filed As Declaratory Suit

The Calcutta High Court has recently set aside an interim injunction granted without hearing the publishers in a dispute over authorship of two chapters in a Chemistry textbook, holding that the plaintiff's suit could not be entertained as an ordinary declaratory action since its core claim arose from alleged copyright rights.

A division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury held, “The foundation of the suit is comprised of rights flowing from the Copyright Act, 1957, thus, coming within the purview of Section 2(1)(c)(xvii) of the Commercial Courts Act, particularly since, as per the valuation of the suit disclosed in the plaint itself, it is above the “specified value” stipulated for the City Civil Court at Calcutta.,”

The dispute arose after respondent Dipankar Majumdar claimed authorship of two chapters in a Chemistry book prescribed under the West Bengal Higher Secondary Council syllabus.

Majumdar alleged that he had authored the manuscripts and handed them over to the publishers in good faith, but they published the material without his permission and without acknowledging him as author.

A City Civil Court had restrained publication of the book unless Majumdar was credited as author.

The publishers challenged that order before the High Court, arguing that the suit was fundamentally a copyright dispute and therefore fell within the scope of a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act.

They contended that although the suit had been framed as a declaratory action, its foundation lay in alleged copyright rights under the Copyright Act.

The appellants also argued that commercial disputes carry specific procedural requirements, including pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, which had not been followed because the matter was filed as a regular civil suit.

The bench accepted that contention, observing that the plaintiff's own pleadings made clear that the cause of action was based on alleged copyright rights over the disputed chapters. The Court also noted that the valuation disclosed in the plaint crossed the specified threshold applicable to commercial disputes before the City Civil Court at Calcutta.

Majumdar had argued that the suit was purely declaratory in nature and that there was no commercial agreement between the parties. He also contended that no specific commercial bench had been notified in the City Civil Court at Calcutta.

Rejecting those arguments, the High Court held that the suit, on the face of the plaint, pertained to a commercial dispute.

“Although the respondent is correct in arguing that despite no particular Bench having been designated by notification as 'Commercial Court' in the City Civil Court at Calcutta, commercial suits are assigned to different Benches of the said Court according to territorial jurisdiction, fact remains that the present suit was filed as a regular declaratory suit and, thus, was entertained by the Trial Court as an ordinary suit,” the bench said.

The Court also found that the injunction was independently unsustainable because the trial judge had failed to record adequate reasons for granting relief without first notifying the defendants.

“Although the learned Trial Judge paid lip-service to reasons in respect of the three tests of injunction, there was no exercise on the part of the learned Trial Judge to advert to the actual materials placed before him, nor was there any specific reason assigned in the impugned order as to why the object of granting the injunction would be defeated by delay,” the Court held.

Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Time City Infrastructure and Housing Limited vs State of U.P., the bench reiterated that reasons justifying urgency in granting such interim relief must be specifically recorded.

The High Court said it was deliberately not examining the merits of the rival copyright claims so as not to prejudice future proceedings, and accordingly set aside the injunction.