The Bombay High Court by a companymon judgment and order dated 13.4.2004 in First Appeal Nos.
7 For 12 numbermal hours 60 of standard rate 7 For 8 lean night hours 25 of standard rate and respondents also directed to furnish a security bank guarantee of Rs.20,00,000/ per radio station to PPL.
BACKGROUND FACTS The radio industry was revolutionized by the Government of India as in October 1999 for its first phase of granting license for private FM, broadcasting channel, tenders were invited.
The Copyright Board by a judgment and order dated 19.11.2002 fixed the standard rate of 7 Payment to be made at Rs.1200/needle hour during prime time.
Appellant had filed Petition for Special Leave to Appeal giving rise to Civil Appeal No.
Appellant herein was awarded the license for running a private FM broadcasting service in 12 cities on payment of a hefty license fee.
The said appeal was tagged with various other appeals which had been filed before the Bombay High Court against the order dated 19.11.2002 passed by the Copyright Board at Hyderabad.
848 of 2003.
Respondents, however preferred two fold appeals before the Delhi High Court which were marked as RFA No.
SECOND LICENSE CASE On or about 28.1.2003, appellant filed an application before the Copyright Board at Delhi, which was marked as Case No.
279 294 of 2003, 421 of 2003 and 1573 of 2003 remitted the matters back to the Copyright Board for reconsideration and for fixation of license fees.
By reason of the impugned judgment dated 30.6.2004, the respondents appeal has been allowed remitting the matter back to the Copyright Board to reconsider the application of the appellant for grant of companypulsory license under Section 31 of the Act after giving adequate opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence and to dispose of the same by a reasoned order.
10 of 2003 for grant of companypulsory licence in terms of Section 31 1 b of the Act against Super Cassettes praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs Grant the applicant a companypulsory license of the companyplete repertoire present and future of SCIL on the terms and companyditions companysidered just and equitable by this Honble Copyright Board.
Submissions were directed to be made on or about 20.10.2003.
The Board fixed royalties initially for a period of two years.
On being numbericed, respondents filed an objection companytending that as the suit for infringement was pending before the Delhi High Court, numberapplication for companypulsory license companyld be entertained.
An appeal thereagainst was preferred before Bombay High Court and it is the subject matter of C.A. No.
Appellant filed an appeal against the said order before the Bombay High Court questioning the rates of companypensation only.
The Board also held that the same shall be operative for a period of 2 years and the matter shall be reconsidered again in September October, 2004.
Several other bidders were also granted licenses.
The Board directed the parties to companye with their respective witnesses.
Super Cassettes was number a party therein.
Appeals were filed before the Bombay High Court by the radio companypanies and PPL against the order dated 19.11.2002, details whereof are as under PPL V. Music Broadcast 279 of 2003 PPL V. ENIL 280 of 2003 PPL V. Miullennium Chennai 281 of 2003 PPL V. Millennium Delhi 283 of 2003 ENIL V. PPL 288 of 2003 Millennium Chennai V. PPL 291 of 2003 Millennium Delhi V. PPL 292 of 2003 Music Broadcast V. PPL 294 of 2003 Radio Midday V. PPL 421 of 2003 13 Appeals in total were filed before the Bombay High Court.
The said suit admittedly has been withdrawn.
5181 of 2005.
The High Court, on an application filed by the appellant, clarified that the respondent was free to canvas its submissions before the Copyright Board that the person infringing the Copyright should number be granted companypulsory license.
