Synopsis

The plaintiff (producer of film ‘tridev’) sought an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the song ‘tirchi topiwale’ (original and remixed version) in the film ‘dhurandhar: the revenge’, alleging infringement of copyright. the plaintiff claimed that a 1988 assignment agreement with defendant no.3 only permitted record‑based exploitation (cassettes, gramophone records), not synchronisation in another cinematograph film. the defendants argued that the plaintiff had suppressed material facts: (i) legal notices exchanged in 2016 regarding use of songs from ‘tridev’ in the film ‘azhar’; (ii) a reply from defendant no.3 asserting complete rights; (iii) multiple lawsuits filed by the plaintiff between 2016‑2020; and (iv) exploitation of another song from ‘tridev’ in the film ‘k.g.f: chapter 1’ in 2019 without any action. the high court denied interim injunction, holding that the plaintiff had approached the court with unclean hands and suppressed material facts. the court directed defendant no.3 to deposit ₹50 lakhs as security instead.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela (Single Judge)

Date of Decision: 14th May 2026

Citation: CS(COMM) 378/2026 (2026:DHC:4280)

Core Law: Copyright Act, 1957 – Sections 14, 21, 51 (infringement); Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 (interim injunction), Order VI Rule 15 (signing of pleadings); principle of clean hands and suppression of material facts.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of delhi at new delhi

Cs(comm) 378/2026, i.a. 10246/2026 & i.a. 10293/2026

Trimurti films private limited (plaintiff) vs. B62 studios private limited & ors. (defendants)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice tushar rao gedela

Date: 14th may, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Copyright act, 1957 – section 14 (meaning of copyright), section 21 (relinquishment of copyright), section 51 (infringement)

• Code of civil procedure, 1908 – order xxxix rules 1 & 2 (temporary injunction), order vi rule 15 (verification)

• Principles of equity – clean hands doctrine, suppression of material facts

Subject matter of the judgment:

Whether a plaintiff in a copyright infringement suit is entitled to an interim injunction under order xxxix rules 1 & 2 cpc when it has suppressed material facts, including prior legal notices, reply from the defendant, previous similar exploitations of the same copyrighted works in ot

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.