Author: Arundathi Krishnadas
In the matter of Anil Kumar Gera Trading As Alka Food Industries vs Mr Ramesh Chander Trading As Anil Food Industries [C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 750/2022], a Single Judge [Sanjay Narula, J.] of the Delhi High Court, vide judgment dated May 2, 2024, ruling in the favour of the Petitioner, has held that non-compliance with the procedural requirement of notifying a party who disputes the subject matter of a copyright application would render such copyright registration invalid.
Section 16(3) of the Copyright Rules, 1958 states that “The person applying for registration shall give notice of his application to every person who claims or has any interest in the subject-matter of the copyright or disputes the rights of the applicant to it.” The question to be considered was whether the person to whom such notice is being given must be a necessary party.
The Petitioner contended that there was a requirement for the Respondent to issue notice to the Petitioner at the time of scrutiny and registration of the subject copyrights. The Respondent, however, argued that there was no requirement for the Respondent to give notice to the Petitioner at the time of securing the copyright registration, as the Petitioner does not fall in the category of an “aggrieved person”.
The Court rejected the Respondent’s narrow reading of Section 16(3) and held that Rule 16(3) of the Copyright Rules, 1958, mandates that any person applying for copyright registration must give notice to every person who claims or has any interest in the subject matter of the copyright or disputes the rights of the applicant. The Court added that even if the narrow interpretation is accepted that the applicant cannot be expected to identify every person who may have an interest in the subject matter—the disjunctive wording of the provision, particularly the phrase “or disputes the rights of the applicant” must be taken into account. Accordingly, the Court further held that “the failure to provide notice constitutes a direct violation of Rule 16 (3) of the 1958 Rules. Such non-compliance renders the registration invalid non-compliance with Rule 16(3) undermines the procedural integrity of the registration process, rendering the registration procedurally incorrect”.
Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.
Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP