R. Suryamurthy
The Bombay High Court has ruled in favour of Saregama India Ltd in a long-running copyright dispute, affirming that all rights in original musical works assigned to the company vest in perpetuity with the assignee. The decision is expected to set a key precedent in Indian intellectual property law, particularly in interpreting the Copyright Act, 1957.
Justice Manish Pitale, presiding over the matter, dismissed the suit filed by Rupali P. Shah, who had alleged copyright infringement by Saregama and others over digital exploitation of musical works originally assigned between 1962 and 1980 by her late father, filmmaker O.P. Ralhan, to Saregama’s predecessor.
The plaintiff argued that the original assignments were limited in scope—restricted to physical formats—and did not cover digital media, particularly in light of the Copyright Act’s 2012 amendments. She also raised questions over the interpretation of “plate” and the nature of post-assignment rights.
Saregama, represented by Khaitan & Co., countered that the rights were assigned in perpetuity and included all forms of exploitation, including emerging digital platforms. The Court concurred, holding that the assignments were legally valid and covered all modes of use, effectively rejecting the plaintiff’s claims of infringement and royalty entitlements.
“This judgment has far-reaching implications on the ownership and assignment of copyrights in India,” said Chakrapani Misra, Partner at Khaitan & Co., who led the legal team. “It clarifies legal ambiguities and strengthens the contractual sanctity of copyright transfers between producers and music companies.”
The case — Rupali P. Shah vs. Adani Wilmer Ltd & Others (Commercial IP Suit No. 101 of 2012) — is a significant development for copyright holders and assignees, especially concerning older works now being monetised through digital platforms.
Appearing for the plaintiff were advocates Ashish Kamat and Rohan Kadam. Naresh Thacker represented Defendant No. 1, while the Khaitan team included Jigar Parmar and Pranali Vyas.
The verdict will likely influence future disputes concerning the digital exploitation of legacy works and the interpretation of copyright assignments executed before the digital era.