R MADHAVAN Vs. S K NAYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 1 of 1978 on the file of the District Court, Tellicherry, is the appellant in this appeal. The above suit was filed for a declaration that the plaintiff was entitled to the exclusive copy right in the literary work of 'Alayazhi' and that the Cinematograph film 'Avalute Ravukal' was an infringement of the plaintiff's copyright, and also for an injunction restraining the defendants from distributing or exhibiting or in any other manner dealing with the above said film and for rendition of account of the profits made by the distribution and exhibition of the film.

(2.) The facts that give rise to the above suit are as follows: The first defendant is the Editor, printer and publisher and the 2nd defendant is the Senior Assistant Editor of a weekly 'Malayalanadu' published from Quilon. The plaintiff is a postgraduate and a teacher working in Kanhanged Durga High School. According to him, he is engaged in literary pursuits and is a poet and a writer of repute and his poems and stories have been published in several magazines and journals of standing. The plaintiff used to make regular literary contributions to the weekly 'Malayalanadu' and because of his continued association with the weekly he desired to have 'Alayazhi published in serials in 'Malayalanadu'. The plaintiff informed the second defendant about the same and on 8-2-1975 delivered the fair manuscript of the novel 'Alayazhi' for the purpose of publishing the same serially in Malayalanadu'. The second defendant assured the plaintiff that the novel would be a landmark in Malayalam novel writing and it would secure the plaintiff a permanent and lasting place in the galaxy of Novelists. The second defendant also promised to the plaintiff to place the novel before the editor for approval and publish the same as soon as the publication of the current serials was completed and also remunerate the plaintiff. Despite this assurance, his novel 'Alayazhi' was not published in the weekly 'Malayalanadu'. Though the plaintiff made repeated enquiries there was no fruitful response from the second defendant and he was coming out with excuse that the novels received earlier were being serialised. In the first week of March, 1978 the plaintiff met the 2nd defendant. Then the 2nd defendant told the plaintiff that announcement of the publication would be made in the next issue of the weekly and the publication would be proceeded with thereafter.

(3.) On 23-3-1978 the plaintiff had occasion to see the Malayalam film, 'Avalute Ravukal', of which the 6th defendant is the distributor. The story and screen play of the film were written by the fourth defendant. The 5th defendant is the Director and the third defendant is the producer of the above said film. On seeing the film he realised that the story of 'Avalute Ravukal' as exhibited in the film is an imitation of his novel 'Alayazhi' and contained several striking similarities of situations and incidents in the novel 'Alayazhi' which the plaintiff had entrusted with the second defendant. The plaintiff averred that his novel 'Alayazhi' is the story of a poor but pretty sexy girl who takes to a life of prostitution in defiance of the challenges of the world, her ecstasies and her fulfilment. He also alleged that the attributes of the girl Ammini, (heroine in 'Alayazhi') her captivating charm and her exuberant sexiness are brought out in all its details in the heroine Raji in the film, Ammini in his novel was poor and could not prosecute her studies due to adversities, the heroine Raji is of poor parentage and because of her financial disability she also could not continue her studies. Similarly Ammini was drawn into the life of prostitution by a jeep driver Sreenivasan. The pimp who played the like role in the film is a ricksha puller Damu. The pimp Sreenivasan in the plaintiff's novel and the pimp Damu in the film are both addicted to liquor of the illicit variety. Ammini stays in the hut of Nagamma, a fair old lady who does not find fault with Ammini's way of life. Raji stays in the hut of one Mariya Chetathi, a character similarly portrayed. Similarly the role assigned to Rajagopalan, a college student and the son of a big landlord in the plaintiff's novel is assigned to Jayan, also an affluent college student. In the plaintiff's novel 'Alayazhi' Rajagopalan obtained the release of Ammini from police while in the film Jayan secured Raji's release from the police. Johny in the plaintiff's novel lives alone in a big house. Likewise Babu in the film lives alone in a big house. The plaintiff alleged that the scenes portrayed by Babu and Raji are deliberately copied from the plaintiff's novel, the scene in the bath room in the film under the shower and in the way in which Raji keeps the house for Babu are taken from the same situations and incidents in the plaintiff's novel. The dream of Raji in the film and the dream of Ammini in the novel are of the same kind, the likeness and the situation are totally alike, and Johny in his novel takes delight in watching Ammini moving about in and in front of the house from the upstairs of the office. Similarly Chandran feasts his eyes on Raji moving in and about the but from the upstairs of his residence. The parents of Johny arranged for Johny's marriage and Johny assents to the proposal. In the film Babu approves the choice of the bride for him. The title of his novel is 'Alayazhi' and several dialogue pieces and situations in the film are all copied from the plaintiff's novel.