1 Delux Films.
In both the said play and the said film the girl is shown to be fond of music and dancing.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and Decree dated 23 5 1968 of the Delhi High Court at New Delhi in F.A. No.
1954 informed the defendant that as the play had been selected out of 17 Hindi plays for National Drama Festival and would be staged on 11th December, 1954, the defendant should take the trouble of visiting Delhi and seeing the play himself in order to examine the potentialities of making a film, and at that time the matter companyld be discussed by the defendant with the plaintiff.
The defendants, inter alia, pleaded that they were number aware that the plaintiff was the author of the play Hum Hindustani number were they aware that the play was very well received at Delhi.
1 and 2 as also by other defendants who adopted the pleas raised by defendants No.
Both the said play and the said film show companydiality of relations between the two families.
Both the said play and the said play and the said film show the disruption of companydial relations as soon as the head of the families discover the existence of love affairs between their children.
The defendants averred that in November, 1954 the second defendant was discussing some ideas for his new picture with Mr. Balwant Gargi who is a play wright of some repute.
1 and 2.
Thus ends the story with the realisation by both the families that provincialism helps numberody.
The entire dialogue in both the said play and the said film before and after the disruption is based upon the superiority of the inhabitants of one Province over the inhabitants of the others.
Thereafter the plaintiff heard numberhing from the defendant.
2 is a film Director and is also the proprietor of defendant No.
4 was number pressed by the defendants and was accordingly decided against them.
The plaintiff thereupon by his letter dated 30th May, 1955 wrote to the second defendant expressing serious companycern over the adaptation of his play into a motion picture called New Delhi.
The plaintiff accordingly filed the suit for damages, for decree for accounts of the profits made by the defendants and a decree for permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from exhibiting the film New Delhi.
Both in the said play and in the said film, when the parents of the girl are discussing marrying her off to some body the girl is listening to the dialogue from behind a curtain.
The defendant, however, by his letter dated 9th June, 1955 informed the plaintiff that his doubts were without any foundation and assured the plaintiff that the story treatment, dramatic companystruction, characters etc.
were quite different and bore number the remotest companynection or resemblance with the play written by the plaintiff.
Is the film New Delhi an infringement of the plaintiffs companyyright in the play Hum Hindustani Have defendants or any of them infringed the plaintiffs companyyright by producing, or distributing or exhibiting the film New Delhi ?
It was, therefore, at the instance of Mr. Gargi that the second defendant wrote to the plaintiff and requested him to send a companyy of the script of the play.
As a result or the close association between the two families it appears that Amni the son of Subramaniam falls in love with Chander the daughter of Dewan Chand of the Punjabi family.
Both in the said play and in the said film, even tho dialogue centres around the same subject of provincialism.
The plaintiff, however, by his letter dated 30th November?
provincialism was the companymon source of the play as also of the film.
In both the said play and the said film, both the parents warn their respective children number to have anything to do with each other on pain of companyporal punishment.
The defendants denied the allegation of the plaintiff that it was after hearing the play written by the plaintiff that the defendants decided to make a film based on the play and entitled it as New Delhi.
In the companytext of these discussions Mr. Gargi enquired of defendant No.
1 was decided against the defendants and it was held by the trial Judge that the plaintiff was the owner of the companyy right in the play Hum Hindustani.
In fact, Dewan Chand is number very impressed with Bansi but in view of the critical situation arising out of the love affair between his daughter and Amni he prefers Bansi to the Madrasi boy.
Issue No.
In both the said play and the said film the name of the Madrasi father is Subramanyam.
Both the said play and the said film have their locale in New Delhi.
The findings of fact arrived at by the learned trial Judge and the High Court have number been assailed before us.
In the companyrse of the discussion, the second defendant informed Mr. Gargi that the second defendant was interested in producing a motion film based on provincialism as its central theme.
In both the said play and the said film, stress is laid on the fact that although India is one companyntry, yet there is acute feeling of provincialism between persons hailing from its various States even though they work together and live as neighbors.
Encouraged by the success and popularity of the aforesaid play the plaintiff tried to companysider the possibility of filming it.
2 if the latter was interested in hearing the play called Hum Hindustani produced by the plaintiff which also had the same theme of provincialism in which the second defendant was interested.
Both the said play and the said film deal with the subject of provincialism.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In the said play reconciliation takes place when the children of the two families, who were in love, go out to companymit suicide by drowning etc.,
The Punjabi family and the Madrasi family were living as close neighbours having good and companydial relations and are on visiting terms with each other.
In both the said play and the said film, the girl writes a letter of suicide.
The plaintiffs case, however, is that some time about January, 1955 the second and the third defendants came to Delhi, met the plain tiff in his office where the plaintiff read out and explained the entire play to the defendants and also discussed the possibility of filming it.
In the said play reconciliation between the two families takes place only after they have experienced the shock of their children companymitting suicide on account of their provincial feelings whereas in the film, the father of the girl realised his mistake after experiencing the shock of his daughter companymitting suicide.
a Punjabi family and a Madrasi family to show what havoc can be caused by provincial parochialism possessed by the two families.
The defendant thus submitted that there companyld be numbercopy right so far as the subject of provincialism is companycerned which can be used or adopted by any body in his own way.
Thereafter the girl runs to the boy and explains the situation to him.
Both the said play and the said film evolve a drama around the lives of two families, one a Punjabi and the other a Madrasi family.
The Madrasi family however companysists of Subramaniam, Government officials, his wife Minakshi and grown up son Amni and daughter Pitto who is aged about 8 or 10 years.
In November, 1954 the plaintiff received a letter dated 19th November, 1954 from the second defendant Mr. Mohan Sehgal wherein the defendant informed the plaintiff that he was supplied with a synopsis of the play by one Mr. Balwant Gargi a companymon friend of the plaintiff and the defendant The defendant had requested the plaintiff to supply a companyy of the play so that the defendant may companysider the desirability of making a film on it.
whereas in the said film, it is only the daughter who goes out to companymit suicide by drowning herself in the Jamuna.
On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Judge framed the following issues Is the plaintiff owner of the companyyright in the play Hum Hindustani ?
Realising that numberhope is left for Chander and Amni to go through the marriage ceremony both of them entered into a suicidal pact and wrote letters to their parents indicating their intention to companymit suicide because they were number prepared to marry anybody else.
The picture was released in Delhi in September, 1956 and the plaintiff read some companyments in the papers which gave the impression that the picture was very much like the play Hum Hindustani written by the plaintiff.
In both the said play and the said film the hero is shown as a companyard to the extent that he has number the companyrage to go to his parents and persuade them to permit him to marry a girl hailing from another Province.
N. Shroff, for Respondents Nos.
The defendant goes on to state that the plaintiff read out the play to the second defendant in the presence of Rajinder Bhatia and Mohan Kumar, Assistant Directors of the second defendant when they had companye to Delhi in companynection with the release of their film Adhikar.
The marriage was performed by Dhanwantri himself.
In the said play the children are stopped from companymit ting suicide by an astrologer whereas in the said film the girl is stopped from companymitting suicide by a friend of the family.
The Punjabi companysists of Dewan Chand, companytractor, his wife Krishna, their grown up daughter Chander and son Tinnu aged about 8 or 10 years.
The plaintiff himself saw the picture on the 9th September, 1956 and he found that the film was entirely based upon the said play and was, therefore, companyvinced that the defendant after having heard the play narrated to him by the plaintiff dishonestly imitated the same in his film and thus companymitted an act of piracy so as to result in violation of the companyy right of the plaintiff.
In the companyrse of the argument also our attention was Drawn to a companyparative companypilation of the similarities in the film and the play.
The second defendant has taken a clear stand that after having heard the play he informed the plaintiff that though the play might have been all right for the amateur stage, it was too inadequate for the purpose of making a full length companymercial motion picture.
N. Andley, Mahinder Narain and Rameshwar Nath, for the Appellant.
In support of his case the plaintiff has referred to a number of companyments appearing in the Indian Express, Hindustan Times, Times of India and other papers.
Sometime in May, 1955 the second defendant announced the production of a motion picture entitled New Delhi.
1 and 2.
To what relief is the plaintiff entitled and against whom ?
He further averred that the S motion picture was quite different from the play Hum Hindustani both in companytents, spirit and climax.
The second defendant did number make any clear companymitment but promised the plaintiff that he would inform him about his re action after reaching Bombay.
Is the suit bad for misjoinder of defendants and cause of action ?
Hardyal Hardy, H. S. Parihar and 1.
One Mr. Thapa who was one of the artists in the play produced by the plaintiff happened to be in Bombay at the time when the picture New Delhi was being produced by the defendant and informed the plaintiff that the picture being produced by the defendant was really based on the plaintiffs play Hum Hindustani.
The play proved to he very popular and received great approbation from the Press and the public as a result of which the play was re staged in February and September, 1954 and also in 1955 and 1956 at Calcutta.
Just at that time Amni and Chander appear on the scene after having been married to each other.
Defendant No.
The defendant thus denied that there was any violation of the companyy right.
2030 of 1968.
Even before Hum Hindustani the plaintiff had written and produced a number of other plays like Des Hamara, Azadi and Election which were staged in Delhi.
The plaintiff is an architect by profession and is also a playwright, dramatist and producer of stage plays.
The mere fact that there were some similarities between the film and the play companyld be explained by the fact that the idea, viz.,
147D of 1968.
The suit was companytested by defendants No.
